I am far from a defender of Gen. Betrayus and am a staunch supporter of the MoveOn ad. I heard Gen. Clark yesterday on TV, I believe The Daily Show, describe Petraeus as being thrown into a game as quarterback with two-thirds gone in the fourth quarter, his team behind by 28 points and his coach asks him to save the game and his team. Unless he refuses to enter the game he can’t go in and tell his team, the game is over, let’s give up, so he has no choice but to sound optimistic and try to inspire his team.

There is some validity to the analogy but not much. What if Gen. Petraeus was telling the coach throughout the game that the team’s strategy was unsound? That playing 4 against 11 was too optimistic especially since the opponent had several players who had an invisibility switch. That trying to train new team members who didn’t speak the same language and had only played soccer while not knowing which team member could be trusted wasn’t working. That adding only one more player still left the ratio too lopsided. That the team was exhausted and wouldn’t listen to any optimistic pleadings no matter how much misleading facts were thrown at them. That a true change in strategy was needed especially considering that the school principal really loved another conference member and was only pretending to like us so that he could keep his job.

Gen. Clark, if Gen. Betrayus really hadn’t been on the team or entered the stadium before and knew that he would have to give up football if he didn’t try, then maybe I could give him some slack. Gen. Clark you let your loyalty to the military and the Army cloud your better judgment when you gave us that weak analogy.

The executive director did no backing down as expected and when he was asked what he thought about the lack of Dem support in the Senate and whether it had damaged the Democrats, he said polls show the country had not bought the Bush-Petraeus show, his org would be talking in future ads about betrayal and it did not represent the Beltway, but the rest of America.

Olbermann's special comment on the hypocrisy of our president and his performance today at a press conference, was what the Dems should have been saying today instead of their milk toast effort.

We need to put Keith into the presidential contest or have him write speeches for a Dem candidate who could find the guts to model my hero Harry Truman and speak the plain truth. As Keith points out, Truman fired Gen. McArthur when he stepped over the line. Gen. Betrayus could have resigned when his CINC asked him to step over the political line, but I doubt he even considered it.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20896378/

Giuliani is such an easy target for the Dems and we should be glad he is the Repugs front runner and should do what we can to keep him in front. Just as the Repug base yearns for a final fight with Hillary because she could revive demoralized Repugs, we would have easy pickens with Rudy.

During his political career, Rudy has honed his do or say anything to get elected or stay in power skills that he will continue to say and do things that make him a sitting duck especially considering the phony decoy team that surrounds him.

He honed his kiss Israel talent in a city where the most influential AIPAC members reside. His zeal to buy votes over dealing professionally with Iran, taking care of 9/11 rescuers or dropping out of the ISG to make money are just a few of so many easy vulnerabilities for even wimpy Dems to shoot at.

Other Repug candidates can also get the saliva flowing when eyeing their target vulnerabilities, but none comes close to Rudy’s prior and future mistakes. We don’t have to resort to the Repug’s truth distortions. We just simply have to tell the truth about Rudy and the Repug slate especially when the Repugs use their repugnant tactics. But we better learn from Gore and Kerry and fire quickly and often. It could be a lot of comeuppance fun.

If we wimp out like 22 Dems did yesterday, then we stand no chance of getting this country and our government out of the swamp. And all of us will remain world targets set up to once again be bushwhacked.

When we first started many threads ago discussing the value of the ad, I and another poster made the point that from a Madison Avenue point of view, the more attention, the more Betrayus is associated with Petraeus, the more the word image is implanted in the American people's consciousness regardless of what side of the issue you are on.

It clearly has had that impact and in the long run will have made considerably more of an impact than the controversy over its use. For those of us opposed to the war, it reminds us that we have to evaluate a military source on the politics or lack thereof involved and then decide its validity. That is a very valuable outcome considering the propaganda, lobbying times we live in today.