MoveOn is taking this approach. Not ready to make nice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygiQuqagoqI

It is such a callous use of emotions. I wonder if these ads are having the Repugs intended effect or are causing more harm to them than help. I hope so but I would much rather they stopped airing these ads.

-- Retired Military Patriot

Write to the repulsive Ari Fleisher with your thoughts. He is fronting those types of adds and getting more and more rich by doing so.

Thank you for your clarification. It seems that we are in complete agreement on this issue.

"What it is you think I should"

Since they've chosen this route, they should continue. Pick their next target, and hit'em again. Hard.

Pick a media figure, pick Bush or Cheney, or hit Petraeus again. But don't just stand there. You've invaded. don't tell me you had no plans for the occupation.

-- casual_observer

They already have an ad in the pipeline of the same tone to be aired as soon a funds permit.

Glenn School of Journalism

Just report the polls. They hold all the truth.

-- tiberius

I rest my case from my page one or two post.

My post was on page three.

@ Anono#jeebuswillthiseverstop?

Can you give us a source for this little nugget you just dropped?

-- Pedinska

He/she/it can't but he/she/it will probably fall back on the George Soros canard as though Soros is a foreigner.

Doesn't deserve anymore replies. He/she/it is clearly and ijit and an azzole.

— Sen. Robert Byrd, West Virginia = $834,211

— Sen. Claire McCaskill, Missouri = $382,531

— Sen. Jon Tester, Montana = $301,788

— Sen. Sherrod Brown, Ohio = $287,622

— Sen. Bob Casey, Pennsylvania = $160,780

--Anonymous

Them fucking foreigners!

Once again someone says General Petraeus should not be listened to because he's "too political" to make an accurate assessment of the military battlefield. So given your opinion, you'd rather listen to Senator Reid, someone who's job is being a politician ALL the time, rather than someone who is a General in the Army (pollitics being a PART of a General's job as well, granted) who is a military person? That just isn't logical to me.

--Anonymous

You gave away the nothing that you had left in the category of credibility in that one paragraph. No, It is not PART of a Generals job to be a politician. If it were then I guess Generals would betray us and the troops at will. This General in question is doing just that. As did General Westmoreland.

You do not accuse a man like this of Betrayal! The people who sent him and hundreds of thousands of troops there, yes. But not one who has put his life on the line for so long and is on site.

-- John Nkomos

We should just ignore the fact that he is lying and that we are losing lives and money in Iraq because he is lying? Is that what you are saying?

But while being a General does mean you have to understand and deal with politics, it does NOT mean you have to (or SHOULD) betray your country.

--Anonymous

And aside from that, I know about that 'military code of justice' bullshit that you fake warriors use at your convenience. If you're a military person you're an embarrassment to the military. If you are or if you're not then you're an embarrassment to the human race in general.

Kitt

I for one do NOT think that he is lying. He BELIEVES what he is saying, as do most of the soldiers and Marines I've talked to who come back and re-enlist. Does that mean they are right? No. It's up to us, the civilians who run this government, to decide what to do in light of what he and others on site say. But YOU are not in Iraq. Neither am I (though my son was). Those over there have not betrayed us.

-- John Nkomos

I do think he is lying. And you have no proof or even a statistic that military people don't also think he's lying. All of that dramatic crap you posted doesn't mean shit.

I wrote this back in 2003 and sent it to 'letters to the editor' of my local newspaper. They published it.

There's an irony in society these days. Well, to be honest, the irony has been going on all along. It’s just that it is more pronounced; more dagger like. Political correctness has long been thought to be the invention of ‘liberals’. ‘Conservatives’ have used 'political correctness' against liberals by scoffing at and berating liberals and calling them a variety of derisive names because of what is perceived to be the liberals’ nauseating political correctness. The favorite derisive name conservatives call them is, of course, ‘Liberals’. Other names are, Tree Huggers, Whiners, Commies, Femi Nazis, Saddamn lovers, Peace Niks, etc. The reason why being a liberal is grounds for facing a firing squad is that they’ve become the politically incorrect. Our main-stream press and those guffawing conservative commentators and columnists, and other floggers of those who express a bent towards the liberal persuasion, have been driving a radical concept into the ‘group think’ of our society. Saying the ‘wrong’ thing at the ‘wrong’ time or place qualifies you as a traitor. Or, dare I say, politically incorrect? Or, in the case of the Dixie Chicks, they’re politically incorrect, and, their music suddenly stinks, too?

virtually imbecilic.

Broder should retire.

-- oldionus

I couldn't disagree more with your post in regards to the word that I have put in bold.

[This is not a trick question.] ;o)

Movin' On

All this talk about MoveOn.org reminded me to send them some more money.

-- SusanMc

"Who am I to disagree?" "Movin' on!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q36TpmhXtlU