Tonight on Countdown Keith Olbermann offered a Special Commentary about President Bush getting his undies in a bunch over that MoveOn.org ad:
Can’t Bring Yourself to Type the Word “Ass”?
Eager to share our brilliant political commentary and blunt media criticism, but too genteel to link to horsesass.org? Well, good news, ladies: we also answer to HASeattle.com, because, you know, whatever. You're welcome!
Keith Olbermann speaks plain truths with a conviction that makes me proud to be an American. I can’t wait to send it to my Republican friends at work.
Moveon.org has forever showed their lying, incompetence, and general bullshit forever. Exposed. ‘Nuff said. Glad they inadvertently helped Rudy though. Hardy-har-har.
Yeah, Mark1, and you wouldn’t waste words on MoveOn in unfriendly territory unless you hoped to divide a few folks amongst themselves.
Take your piss-poor preening on home, back under your rock.
Rust never sleeps
There is still time to impeach him and the junta.
Oh, that is right, The d’s think they should win the Presidency rather than defend the Constitution.
Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil.
Let’s remember who movon.org really is…. it’s just a Clinton front group. If you’ll remember, it was formed during Bubba’s impeachment after he lied to a grand jury in an attempt to conceal a pattern of predatory behavior in a felony assault case that he settled for $800k.
The wanted to just “move on” past all the crime, corruption, and sleaze of the Clinton’s. Didn’t happen then; not gonna happen now.
So anything they do is just a front for The Smartest Woman In The World. Notice she didn’t denounce them or the ad. Which means she’d rather insult the US Military than chance offending the loony kook fringe. I hope they keep it up.
I certainly wish her well on her platform of Surrender and Socialism.
@5
Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still voting for evil.
And not voting for the lesser of two evils makes it easier for the greater of two evils to win.
Keith Olbermann ought to at least get his history correct: Abraham Lincoln thoroughly trounced George McClellan in the 1864 presidential election, so Olbermann’s characterization of Lincoln “barely” winning re-election is completely false.
With a winning percentage of 55%, which qualifies definitionally as a landslide, Lincoln received 2.2 million popular votes to McClellan’s 1.8 million, carrying 22 out of 25 states (for some strange reason, 11 southern states didn’t participate in the 1864 election).
In the all important Electoral College, Lincoln received 212 votes to McClellan’s 21.
Given such a glaring error when less than 30-seconds worth of fact-checking would reveal the truth, one has to wonder whether Keith Olbermann gets anything right?
Given his ratings among the all important 25 – 54 demographic, I have to think that others question his judgment, too.
Per Nielsen Media Research as reported by MediaBistro.com, his audience on Wednesday, September 19th was a 209 share compared to Bill O’Reilly’s 480 on Fox News. Among total viewers, the picture is even gloomier: Olbermann 541, O’Reilly 2227.
So…Olbermann’s viewers include his mother, members of MoveOn.org, netroots, presumably some employees of MSNBC, a few Democratic presidential candidates, some HA posters, and…not many others.
Oh…let’s not forget the recent U.S. Senate 72 to 25 vote denouncing MoveOn’s Petraeus/Betray Us ad. The Senate resolution reads as follows:
“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.”
Everyone’s favorite Profile in Courage, Maria Cantvotewell, did a duck and cover by not voting. She was joined in this effort to put it all out on the public record by Sen. Barack Obama.
The Piper
Dick Cheney’s creation of no-bid contracts for Halliburton, his support of ‘tort reform’ that specifically targets suits against asbestos poisoning (of which Halliburton is a major offender), and his creation of a private ”Blackwater’ army to suppress this nation when he declares martial law displays: “…a pattern of predatory behavior.” MTR
For once, with a little help, you got it right.
#8 — So, you are aware of the significance of Al Gore having won the popular vote in 2000.
STOP ATTACKING GENERAL PETRAEUS YOU LIBERALS! HE ONLY WROTE A REPORT ON THE PREZNIT’S ORDERS!!! YOU GUYS ARE GANGING UP ON HIM!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH! STOP IT. STOP IT!
WAAAAAAAAH.. THE POOR PREZNIT JUST CAN’T CATCH A BREAK. THE PEOPLE DON’T LIKE HIM ANYMORE! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAH… HE CAN’T GET ABOVE 33 PERCENT… WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH… HE AND PATRIOTIC COMPANIES LIKE BLACKWATER AND HALLIBURTON ARE TRYING TO PROTECT US FROM THE EVIL SWARTHY TERRAISTS. WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHH!
STOP ATTACKING GENERAL PETRAEUS!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH…
Holy shit… scientists now think The Sun may be responsible for global warming on Neptune.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/.....une21.html
What a crazy theory. Obviously it’s all the SUVs there. Dumshits…
@8: So then you support President Bush hiding behind the skirts of David Petraeus?
Because if correcting a small historical fact in a six minute editorial is the best you got, I’m not too worried, really.
I said it at the time, the MoveOn ad stupidly handed the Republicans a gigantic stick to beat on us with for no particular gain. That doesn’t change the fact that the emperor has no clothes.
-OM
@9…S-Choir….
And Dick Cheney did all this on a grassy knoll in Dallas??? Aided by space aliens he had released from confinement in Roswell, NM?
The Piper
Olbermann is 100% right.
Bush’s popularity, and credibility is so low, people just turn off the tv when he opens his lying mouth to spew more propaganda.
How dare Bush bribe a military officer to carry his water. How dare he. It just shows how pathetic his administration is. An utter disgrace.
The Bush slime machine, after losing all credibility because of their lying mistakes, and incompetence, had to do something to keep their war going on. They effectively changed the subject from how much of a total, utter, undeniable disaster this war has been to “surge or no surge”. What a brilliant political move. With a little help with the compliant right wing controlled media, we are not talking full time about the corpses piling up, the flag draped coffins coming home, the trillions in costs, and the refugee camps overflowing. We are not talking about the utter destruction of another country for a few madmen’s lust for power, oil, and wealth.
Bush pushed the ball down the road till “September” and then had a semi-honorable man come and give skewed statistics to congress, and let their friends in the media paint a 100 mile thick pile of lipstick on this pig’s ass. Brilliant move. I commend them.
If Bush told the 21%ers to drink the punch, Middle America would look like Jonestown. Bush is their god. I am not kidding one bit. No amount of proof can sway his supporters. Blind faith in a proven incompetent liar.
I don’t see the problem with impeaching this lying piece of slime in the White House. The government is divided, and the Republicons are blocking all legislation in the Senate. Nothing is getting done, and the corpses keep coming home in flag draped (secret) coffins. They are even having to expand military graveyards to bury all the soldiers killed in this quagmire.
#13, it is not that bad. Bush had set us up for the testimony of “an honorable” soldier, to quash dissent on his failed war, and move on trashed that fallacy.
The general was put their simply to carry Bush’s water, and someone needed to call them on it. Their dog and pony show can not go on practically un-opposed forever.
When you call them on their slime, they get really mad.
Good for Moveon.org
I just gave Move On $$$.
Remember we lost the war in Iraq the day Bush was appointed president by the Supreme Court.
It took all these years for a leader to create a larger disaster for his country than Napoleon’s march on Moscow.
@10…S-Choir…
Yes…so? This significance of that has what to do with Olbermann’s sloppiness with facts that an 8th-grader ought to know?
BTW…wasn’t the first time in U.S. history: the 1888 presidential election was won by Benjamin Harrison over incumbent Grover Cleveland based upon Harrison’s 233 electoral votes to Cleveland’s 168 despite Cleveland carrying the popular vote, albeit by less than one percantage point.
As an aside…all modern presidential campaigns are conducted with an eye toward the electoral vote, not just carrying the popular vote. Remember, The United States is an indivisable union of semi-soverign individual states, and the electoral college both recognizes that fact and helps to keep a balance of power between and among states.
The U.S. Senate does essentially the same thing since each state, regardless of population, is entitled to two senators while seats in the House of Representatives are apportioned among the several states based upon population.
Your point again was what???
The Piper
@13…OM…
The devil is always in the details…Olbermann either lied about the 1864 election, or his reporting was so negligently sloppy as to commit a turd-in-the-punchbowl level of error in the set up to whatever point he was trying to make.
Either way, he fubared whatever credibility he might have had…Maybe he should stick to sports reporting and collecting baseball cards, which I understand is his passion.
The Piper
@15…FSMP…
So…Olbermann was 100% right? Even when he was wrong? Clever that, eh what?
Bush’s popularity and credibility are low, no two ways about that. But are they as low as the Democratically led Congress?
The Piper
#18 Piper. If all the Republicons were kicked out of congress, or not allowed to voe, congressional approval would be at 71%. An all time high.
I know one way for approval to spike.
Start an impeachment.
Bang 50%.
@19…Can’t Produce Any Facts to Support His Position…
Prove it.
The Piper
@3:
Too bad you don’t even have the balls to admit your little propaganda site stuck a foot up their own ass……
The SportsCenter host masquerading as a serious “journalist” may as well have his own talk show on Air America. Does any serious person believe he is an objective unbiased “journalist?
KO – go back to SportsCenter where you belong!!!
#14 — WOW! You sure know how to win an argument using facts – not.
Everything I said about Cheney is true and easily verified.
That’s what is bugging you. You know that you are deliberately ignoring the facts and the truth.
#22 — We have a mentally challenged cheerleader pretending to be president, so give Olbermann a little slack.
At least he can read better than Bush. Bush can’t read. He’s dyslexic and illiterate.
@8
Keith Olbermann ought to at least get his history correct: Abraham Lincoln thoroughly trounced George McClellan in the 1864 presidential election, so Olbermann’s characterization of Lincoln “barely” winning re-election is completely false.
Olbermann probably shouldn’t have said “nearly”, but that hardly discredits the larger points he was making about Petraeus and blurring the line between politics and the military.
Given such a glaring error when less than 30-seconds worth of fact-checking would reveal the truth, one has to wonder whether Keith Olbermann gets anything right?
Oh, please. If that’s the most inaccurate thing you can come up with, Olbermann is by far the most accurate news host on television.
Oh…let’s not forget the recent U.S. Senate 72 to 25 vote denouncing MoveOn’s Petraeus/Betray Us ad. The Senate resolution reads as follows:
“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.”
Right, and now you understand why Congress has an approval rating of around 10-15%. Because they’re horribly out of touch with the American public, who is overwhelmingly on the side of MoveOn when it comes to the war.
@17
The devil is always in the details…Olbermann either lied about the 1864 election, or his reporting was so negligently sloppy as to commit a turd-in-the-punchbowl level of error in the set up to whatever point he was trying to make.
Are you a complete idiot? The point he was trying to make was that it’s important for a president to stand up for the divide between military and political decisions. His example from the civil war would have actually worked better if he’d characterized Lincoln’s victory as a landslide, in that our nation would have recognized the dangers of turning into a nation led by a military junta.
And if someone actually points out the inaccuracy to Olbermann, he’ll correct it. But something tells me that only nutjobs like you, who have become needlessly obsessed with the people who are telling the truth about this war, are the only people who manage to notice these details that are irrelevant to the larger (and very important) point that he’s making.
@20
If you don’t believe that starting impeachment hearings against both Bush and Cheney would raise the approval rating for Congress, your head is buried in the sand.
Jesus, listen to all the screaming trolls!
Scott attacks Olberman:Shoot the messenger! We can’t HAVE this!
Mark1 just trolls in here and hisses about Moveon and how awful they are! They’re getting all this attention! So did the Swift Boat Liars. And Moveon is telling the truth. Even Bush doesn’t deny the message, just finds it “disgusting”.
MTR, buffoon as usual, decides to come here where everybody considers him a tasteless joke, to impart words of wisdom. Let me assure you that you’re accomplishing a great deal here! We all hang on your every word, oh font of knowledge.
What does it take to be a Mark here? Any Mark? Vaseline, a keyboard,and a dialup connection in a public housing unit.
Losers.
How does it feel to be going down the drain?
“Right, and now you understand why Congress has an approval rating of around 10-15%.”
And who controls both houses?
By the way, awesome job in the Senate today.
http://apnews.myway.com/articl.....O2080.html
You libs are so divided, that you are making 08 almost as easy as we made 06 for you.
“If you don’t believe that starting impeachment hearings against both Bush and Cheney would raise the approval rating for Congress, your head is buried in the sand.”
Then why doesn’t your side take their heads out of the sand, and actually do it? Oh wait, that would require a type of fortitude not often found in the Liberal wing. Look you guys had your referendum vote on Iraq. You kicked the crap outta us in 06. And you have accomplished nothing. I think Pelosi should stand with a Mission Accomplished banner behind her. Because as you libs so often criticize, Mission “Nothing” Accomplished.
Oh yeah, how does it feel to know the President Bush’s approval ratings are that much higher than your liberal congress?
@29
And who controls both houses?
Clueless Democrats.
You libs are so divided, that you are making 08 almost as easy as we made 06 for you.
That depends on whether the American public sees the problem with Congress as one of there being too few Democrats there or not (people understand that a slight majority is not enough to get things done and are more likely to try to increase that majority). The bottom line is that the American public will be voting very vehemently against any politician or party that isn’t trying to end this war.
@27…Lee…
Prove it…Show me data that impeaching the President will result in improving Congress’ approval rating.
@26
Olbermann doesn’t know American military history, and, obviously, neither do you. Since day one, political decisions by civilian authorities have driven many, though, not all military strategies.
WW II is chock full of instances where a decision to do or not do something was political in nature, not military. You can look it up!
The Piper
The Piper
@30
Then why doesn’t your side take their heads out of the sand, and actually do it?
Because they’re conditioned to fear boldness. And yes, they suck.
Oh wait, that would require a type of fortitude not often found in the Liberal wing.
It’s found in places like MoveOn. Are you saying that the MoveOn part of the party has more fortitude?
Look you guys had your referendum vote on Iraq. You kicked the crap outta us in 06. And you have accomplished nothing.
Exactly. But the American people are certainly not looking towards Republicans for real solutions either. I actually think it’s becoming very ripe for a third-party candidate right now.
I think Pelosi should stand with a Mission Accomplished banner behind her. Because as you libs so often criticize, Mission “Nothing” Accomplished.
It would be truly ironic, but since it won’t happen, you’ll at least still be able to see what separates the parties still.
Oh yeah, how does it feel to know the President Bush’s approval ratings are that much higher than your liberal congress?
It doesn’t surprise me at all. It’s always harder to get approval from people whose brains work. That’s why the Democratic Congress has higher approval from Republicans than Democrats.
“It’s found in places like MoveOn. Are you saying that the MoveOn part of the party has more fortitude?”
No, you are. It doesn’t take fortitude to attack and falsely accuse a great American Military Leader. To do that, it takes a level of closed mindedness and cowardice.
@32
A majority of Americans now want impeachment hearings over Bush and Cheney over 9/11. I think a lot of those people are full-on bonkers, but that’s the reality:
http://www.emediawire.com/rele.....551899.htm
I did not say that impeachment is the right way to go (I’ve been on the fence for a while), I’m saying that it would be very popular.
WW II is chock full of instances where a decision to do or not do something was political in nature, not military. You can look it up!
Of course it was. But those decisions were not made by the President and sold to the American public in a dog and pony show by a willing General. Did the entire point of Olbermann’s commentary just go flying right over your head?
@34
Are you brain dead?
Here’s what you said in comment #30 about impeachment:
Then why doesn’t your side take their heads out of the sand, and actually do it? Oh wait, that would require a type of fortitude not often found in the Liberal wing.
And here’s what you said in comment #34 about MoveOn, who strongly supports impeachment:
It doesn’t take fortitude to attack and falsely accuse a great American Military Leader. To do that, it takes a level of closed mindedness and cowardice.
So let me understand this. It takes fortitude to impeach the president, but attacking the military leader who has agreed to be the spokesperson for the president doesn’t take fortitude?
Huh?
@35…Lee…
You’ve reached a new low…
You cite a poll by sponsored by one of the so-called 9/11 truth outfits, the folks who bring you conspiracy theories that the Twin Towers’ collapse was an inside job.
The poll results themselves, though, don’t support your claim, and you mischaracterize them since they claim that 51% of the American people want to probe the role of the Prexy and Veep in the 9/11 attacks, but only 30% or so support impeachment.
At any given time in modern politics, 30% of the opposition supports impeaching an incumbent; where’s the news in that?
The first rule of holes: When in one, quit digging.
The Piper
@32:
Thank you for confirming Olberman’s point! The system here in America is military people should deal with military problems and political people should deal with political problems. It’s when generals stray into politics that things go pear shaped.
And for Bush to drag Petraeus into a political argument is exactly the wrong thing to do.
See, when you actually reason it out it’s not so hard. And a minor point about an election 150 years ago isn’t so important to the main point.
-OM
#37 — One man’s plan is another’s conspiracy.
You are an idiot, but I don’t think it’s a conspiracy. Conspiracies require intelligence and planning. What you do requires only resentment, hatred, and stupidity.
@37
You’ve reached a new low…
You cite a poll by sponsored by one of the so-called 9/11 truth outfits, the folks who bring you conspiracy theories that the Twin Towers’ collapse was an inside job.
It was conducted by Zogby.
The poll results themselves, though, don’t support your claim, and you mischaracterize them since they claim that 51% of the American people want to probe the role of the Prexy and Veep in the 9/11 attacks, but only 30% or so support impeachment.
What do you think impeachment hearings are? They’re basically a probe, which is what a majority of Americans apparently support. And as you know, even an approval rating of 30% for Congress would be an improvement. How on earth can you not comprehend how this action would improve their standing?
At any given time in modern politics, 30% of the opposition supports impeaching an incumbent; where’s the news in that?
It’s not 30% of the opposition. It’s 30% of the entire country. And even when Clinton was impeached, fewer Americans supported it:
http://www.democrats.com/clinton-impeachment-polls
The first rule of holes: When in one, quit digging.
That is good advice. When is your stupid ass going to start following it?
If Bush is hiding behind the General, then why is it “bad” to attack the General?
This is just a dog and pony show to extend the war to hand off to the next president.
I truly believe that instead of making “mistakes” like not guarding the weapons caches and laying off the Iraqi Army, the Bush Crime Family actually planned for the carnage in Iraq. Look at how much money their buddies are making off oil. The profit on a barrel is up 5 fold by one graph I saw.
They wanted chaos. That is why they sent children to manage to reconstruction, and told Powell to back off.
There is no way they could ignore diplomacy all this time by accident.
They want corpses.
The General is playing along.
He is fair game.
@38…OM…
I ought to charge tuition for what I teach you people…
Military leaders make political decisions all the time. Ike made them daily during WW II. Concentrating military efforts to destroy V-1 and V-2 rocket bases was based upon British domestic political and morale considerations, not whether it was the best move to win the military war. Ditto letting DeGaulle enter Paris first, or giving undue credit to Field Marshall Montgomery. Political, political, political.
Allowing the Soviets to take as much of Germany and Eastern Europe as they did was a political decision, and it resulted in over 40-years of Cold War.
Gen. Petraeus made a detailed and factual report to Congress. Generals do that all the time, so what’s the big deal? He answered questions honestly, including ones that some could argue cast both him and the President in an unfavorable light.
The Piper
Anyone supporting the Bush Crime Family, after the truth is so plain to see, is an enemy of the United States of America.
We have been lied to every step of the way when it comes to Iraq. From mushroom clouds (all of them), and yellowcake, (Wilson) to known to have been destroyed WMD’s. (Drumheller) From the cost (Wolfowitz), to the ties between Saddam and Bin Laden (Cheney). Lie, lie, lie, lie, and lie some more. And the 21%ers eat it up.
Why would these animals stop lying now?
The General crossed the line trying to sell (shove down our throats) Bush’s failed war, and failed policies, and it is not his job to lie to the country. It is Bush’s job!!!!! (And Snow, and Fleischer, and McClellan….)
Personally I have had enough of being lied to.
#42 Piper, the General gave numbers, but did not say they are counting different. He also forgot to mention that according to one poll 100% of the residents in Al Anbar said it was just fine to attack coalition forces.
They changed how they count bodies, so the General could claim progress that is either negligible, or non existant. In fact, Iraq is probably more fractured now, than it has ever been.
I am tired of the lies.
Prosecute Betrayus too.
I am also sick of the propaganda. Any news story that does not refer to Iraq as a disaster is propaganda.
Name one good thing that came from our invasion, and occupation.
Democracy in Iraq? My ass. They are running death squads all night long on both sides. Their “elected” strong men are dialing up death, and their government is even more corrupt than ours, if that is possible.
End this disaster. Do whatever we have to do to get the rest of the world help us clean up Bush’s mess, while we send him to his war crimes trial.
@42
I ought to charge tuition for what I teach you people…
We’re not learning from you. We’re laughing at you.
Military leaders make political decisions all the time. Ike made them daily during WW II. Concentrating military efforts to destroy V-1 and V-2 rocket bases was based upon British domestic political and morale considerations, not whether it was the best move to win the military war. Ditto letting DeGaulle enter Paris first, or giving undue credit to Field Marshall Montgomery. Political, political, political.
But in those cases, the Generals did not go on directed PR campaigns for the political leaders of the time. That’s the difference, and that’s why what happened with General Petraeus was a step above and beyond the examples you’re citing.
Allowing the Soviets to take as much of Germany and Eastern Europe as they did was a political decision, and it resulted in over 40-years of Cold War.
Whoa! You are so far from understanding Olbermann’s point, it’s not even funny. That doesn’t make sense within the original point you were trying to make. That political decision was made, in part, because of the military realities of the time. No one at the time was saying “we think letting the Soviets take over Germany is a smart military maneuver, that’s why we’re doing it.”
Gen. Petraeus made a detailed and factual report to Congress.
No he didn’t. He said a number of things that are very clearly not true.
Generals do that all the time, so what’s the big deal?
He misrepresented what is happening in Iraq in order to maintain support for a political policy.
He answered questions honestly, including ones that some could argue cast both him and the President in an unfavorable light.
Right, and those of us who are paying attention, could see right through the entire charade and knew that Petraeus was being used to sell the President’s policy rather than to deal honestly with the complex problems that we’re dealing with. A majority of Americans easily saw this.
Wait till Moveon.org takes out a full page ad pointing out all the dishonest testimony Betrayus gave.
One thing is going good. The ethnic cleansing is going so good, there are fewer targets living in the wrong areas, and the death rate may actually decline.
That is what you get when you have 4 million Iraqis displaced, with most of them living in refugee camps in other countries.
Everyone supporting this war should try living in a tent in southern Syria in 120 degree heat, with your 4 children, eating bugs.
http://www.macleans.ca/images/.....s_Oct1.JPG
Here’s a photo what our neighbors to the nnorth think of Bush.
Piper,
You’re breaking new records in stupidity on this thread and veering further and further away from a point that you can’t comprehend in the first place, so let me actually try to help you out here.
The problem is not that there are decisions made in war that are political in nature. The problem is when political decisions are made but the president hides behind people in the military who are loyal enough to provide cover for his lousy political decisions by making it seem as if we’re not supporting the military. That’s disingenuous and insulting to anyone who truly cares about this country.
@41…Couldn’t Find Facts to Support Your Position to Save Your Life Even if You Had To…
You can disagree with conclusions, question statistics, offer alternative theories, or even proffer contradictory evidence, but when you impugn the character and honor of a soldier doing his duty, then the one who ends up looking dishonorable is you, not him.
You make seveal assertions in your post: PROVE THEM! You accuse people of doing things with perfidious motives: PROVE IT! Data, data, data…Facts, facts, facts.
The Piper
@50
You can disagree with conclusions, question statistics, offer alternative theories, or even proffer contradictory evidence, but when you impugn the character and honor of a soldier doing his duty, then the one who ends up looking dishonorable is you, not him.
Sorry, but when a soldier feels that it’s his duty is to give false conclusions, doctor statistics, offer up ridiculous theories, and distort evidence in order to help the president sell a failed political policy, the honorable thing to do is to question his character. That’s what patriots do.
@48…S-Choir…
Isn’t that special! And from a country whose naval tonnage is exceeded by the BC Ferry System.
Essential to understanding Canadian politics is accepting the little brother – big brother tension and “Mom always liked you best!” antagonism and opposition toward U.S. policies exhibited by many in Canada.
Go study the Red River Rebellion, Joey Smallwood and the politics of Newfoundland, Western Canada’s long-simmering resentment against the elites in Ontario and the drain upon Canadian federal resources that is the perpetually broken Maritime Provinces, and anything to do with the disaster called Quebec, and you wouldn’t waste your time citing Canadian magazines.
What Canadians probably think of Bush is what I might think of Lester Pearson or Pierre Eliott Trudeau…
The Piper
@51…Lee…
Can you prove that’s what Gen. Petraeus did? That he intentionally and wilfully lied? That he proffered false data? That he did all that you allege?
If you cannot, then you’ve commited libel (when you publish it in written form it’s libel as opposed to the spoken word which is slander).
Careful…While Gen. Petraeus is a public figure, the “actual malice” standard of NY Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), might render you liable.
Sometimes when you play with fire, you get burned.
The Piper
@52
Hey, why don’t you post up the full list of all the books you tried to read but aren’t smart enough to understand that have led you to conclude that Americans don’t have to worry about what the rest of the world thinks?
What Canadians probably think of Bush is what I might think of Lester Pearson or Pierre Eliott Trudeau…
The difference is that many Canadians are smart enough for their opinions to matter.
@53
Can you prove that’s what Gen. Petraeus did? That he intentionally and wilfully lied? That he proffered false data? That he did all that you allege?
You can start here:
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004215.php
He most certainly lied in saying that the surge is working to achieve its political goals. The GAO report released about a month ago clearly contradicts that, showing that 15 of 18 benchmarks haven’t been met. Considering that the main point of the surge was to provide the breathing room for political reconciliation, this clearly has not happened (the Iraqi government is barely on life support right now).
In order to do this, he knowingly misrepresented well-established facts about the number of American and Iraqi casualties. No doubt he hid behind some creative accounting in order to do so, but that’s a willful lie to you and me.
If you cannot, then you’ve commited libel (when you publish it in written form it’s libel as opposed to the spoken word which is slander).
Tell him to sue me.
Careful…While Gen. Petraeus is a public figure, the “actual malice” standard of NY Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964), might render you liable.
You really think I’m worried, numbnuts?
Sometimes when you play with fire, you get burned.
Yeah, so how does it that feel, Doris? Do you want to take off your skirt sometime today and throw out some facts or are you content with me humiliating you?
Thanks Lee. I am at work, and don’t have time to provide links to the obvious.
There may have been some progress in some areas. At an unbelieveable cost. We don’t truly know because everyone reporting the facts on the ground is practically lying to us, and have been every step of the way.
This does not help the total picture one bit, because the Iraqi government is fracturing more every day.
The only real solution is diplomatic, and Bush could not even spell the word diplomacy. All else is lipstick on a very, very, very ugly pig. These people hate each other, and we need help keeping them from killing each other.
America needs to deal with this fact.
The first step (Paul Craig Roberts) would be for in prosecution of the animals that lied us into this war.
@55
Where there has been progress, it’s been at a very micro level. What Petraeus deserves some credit for is challenging some of the conventional thinking about counter-insurgency that dominated the first few years of the occupation. I’ve listened to Thomas Ricks on this, and there does appear to be more sanity in how the military engages with some of the local Iraqis.
But at a higher level, we’ve created a situation where Petraeus’ methods just built a 30 foot wall instead of a 10 foot wall to protect us from a 100 foot tidal wave. The seeds of the disaster were already planted. What the White House got out of Petraeus was a military general who was motivated to paint what’s happening in a positive light in order to be able to say “hey, my counter-insurgency plan works!”
Piper, everybody else has pretty much schooled you so I’ll only take the time to point out that the decision to “let the Soviets take … as much of Europe as they did” was NOT made by the generals.
Try reading up on Yalta sometime. That would involve Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin carving up Europe. The Soviets weren’t “allowed” anything. They were already well within Germany and the POLITICAL leadership worked out the best deal they could.
By your own standards, all of your arguments are rendered moot and we can safely ignore you.
-OM
Piper, from Cindy Sheehan to me. I am a Gold Star Member. (and also know Cindy from when I went to Camp Casey to help her protest)
“What I find disgusting is CNN (where I just saw Eli Parisier of MoveOn debate a pro-war person) rarely criticizes the occupation or shows the tragic consequences of this war and they are raising money so a poor Iraqi boy can have reconstructive surgery on his badly burned face. That is great, but what about examining the reasons little Youssif was burned in the first place and start calling for an immediate withdrawal of troops? What about the millions of other Iraqis who have been wounded or displaced? Who is telling their stories and raising money for them to be whole and have homes?”
Who is going to do reconstructive surgery on the other tens of thousands of Iraqi children who were maimed because of us not treating lying leaders like the traitors they are.
You right wing corpse lovers make us real Americans sick to our stomachs. The more Bush, and his front men lie, the more you zombies support him. Now you wanna condemn Move On for calling liars liars. Since you don’t believe in the 1st amendment, why don’t you move to Red China. They have the type of government Bush dreams of.
#53 — All we have to do is refer to the Washington Post article wherein Petraes’ lies are exposed.
The propaganda machine called CNN, and Fox never show the corpses, or the flag draped coffins coming home. Too graphic for squeamish Americans.
Maybe if the slime that still supports Bush saw piles, and piles of dead children’s body parts, they may think differently. Maybe not. They appear to cherish the death of innocent children who just got in the way of our war machine, and our lust of petroleum, who knows.
All Bush Supporters belong in Iraq stuck between two well armed militas that hate each other……
#53 Piper; Sometimes when you play with fire, you get burned.
I don’t play with fire. I wield it.
And the truth is always on my side.
Does it suck always being wrong? Maybe you should take a long hard look at your “side” and it’s lust for power at any cost….
Here’s a bunch of links to newspaper articles about the lies in the Petraeus Report. I suggest , Piper, that you read them before spouting off any more……
http://autumnhaiku.newsvine.co.....sistencies
@57…OM…
Ah…Yalta…the great sell out of the 20th-Century…second only to Munich.
Allied troops were ordered to hold up and not venture deeper into Germany and much of Eastern Europe in order to let the Red Army take control. This infuriated some like Gen. George S. Patton, Jr., who was all for pushing deeper into Austria, the former Czechoslovakia, and Germany and presenting the Russians with a fait accompli.
This POLITICAL decision over rode military considerations and opportunities, and it was a sell-out to the Russians, not the “…best deal they could (get).”
The Piper
@62: Do you even read your own words?
I thought letting the Reds take Eastern Europe was a political decision the generals took. That was your position @42, now you’re saying the politicians sold out the military. You have no idea what the hell point you’re making, do you?
And OBTW, the Americans weren’t about to push the Soviets out of Eastern Europe even if they wanted to. They had about 1/3 the forces of the Soviets at the time of Yalta and still another front open in the Pacific.
You have to at least TRY to look like there’s a brain engaged. Right now you just look like a fool.
-OM
@55…I Make Up My Facts As I Go Along Because Reality Is Too Unpleasent For Me…
Paul Craig Roberts is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist whose credentials as a civil or structural engineer are that he may or may not have been nice to his mother.
Yes, the Iraqi government is a mess…name a government that isn’t. And yes the factions need to be prevented from warring with each other. But how would diplomacy alone prevent this? Some progress – diplomatic progress – is being made flipping some Sunni insurgents, but further effort is required.
@58…
You should know that I am a two-star, blue-star dad. My oldest did six-months in Kuwait just before the war, a year in Baghdad, and just returned from a special five-week assignment in Afghanistan. I genuinely mourn the loss of every American life, because both Iraq and Afghanistan affect me personally.
But those maimed Iraqi children? Who maimed them? U.S. forces, or insurgents currently being egged-on by outside influences such as al-Quida or Iran? Or al-Quida types themselves?
Where do you get the notion I don’t like the First Amendment? Just because I’m willing to call MoveOn.org for the lying bunch of hating demagogues who knee-jerk (or is that goose step?) support it?
Want to talk vicious censorship? Let me again encourage you to read what Jane Hamsher wrote about Elizabeth Edwards over at Arianna Huffington’s blog:
“So I guess we have to say it once again until everyone gets it — you never repeat right wing talking points to attack your own, ever. You never enter that echo chamber as a participant. Ever. You never give them a cudgel to beat the left with.
Just. Don’t. Do. It.”
To Hamsher and her fellow travellors, the right to express an opinion contrary to hers…doesn’t exist! Goebbel’s would have been so proud!
@60…
Where are the pictures of piles upon piles of dead children’s body parts? You have them? Or do you only wish they existed…dead children, that is, so you could score political points in a MoveOn.org sort of way?
Surprised you’re so boned at the Clinton News Network. I guess I learn something new every day.
@61…
Thanks for being so delightfully absurd. You make it all so much fun!!!
The Piper
“Lee Hamilton, Cheney’s Democratic colleague, believes that a poisonous political environment is partly responsible for Cheney’s low poll numbers. … ‘(T)here are few Democrats who have personal contact with him today. If more people had personal relations with him, that would make a difference.'”
And after you Goldycrats have personal relations with Deadeye Dick, he’ll put the shotgun in the shotgun wedding. How cool is that?
(Fiar-use plagiarism via Stephen F. Hayes’ Cheney bio, page 507.)
@63…OM…
Roosevelt was literally sick unto death when he and Churchill agreed to Stalin’s demand to hold a Big Three summit at the Black Sea resort town of Yalta. There’s a lot of historical evidence from all persuasions to suggest that FDR wasn’t up to the task, hence Stalin’s insistence on something so physically taxing.
What Roosevelt wanted from Stalin was Russia’s entry into the war against Japan, in return for which Roosevelt ceded Soviet hegemony over what became countries behind the Iron Curtain. Tragically also, that same Soviet entry allowed the Red Army to poor down into China giving cover and support to Maoist elements then “cooperating” with Chiang kai-Shek’s Nationalist Chinese.
Roosevelt thought he could “do business” with “Uncle Joe” at the U.N., which turned out be a false premise. Stalin reneged on his Yalta commitments, and the Cold War started. By then, Roosevelt was dead.
One of the finest moments in modern American military history, BTW, is the Berlin Airlift and the effort of the U.S. under Harry Truman’s stubborn leadership to thwart Soviet efforts to seize control of West Berlin. What made it effective was that the Russians were made to believe that Truman would go to war, if necessary, to retain the three negotiated access routes from West Germany to West Berlin. Stalin tried bluff, intimidation, lying about ration cards, currency double shuffles, and a few episodes of murder, but in the end, the Russians backed down.
Geo-political political decisions oft times supplant military ones, not always wisely, but they do. Military leaders, themselves, must make political decisions within their own realms of authority, and likewise not always wisely.
Eisenhower’s management of the Allied coalition was as much politcal as military. Yet his willingeness to draw short toward the end of the war was, to him, military, but it ignored far reaching political considerations.
A lesson that can be learned from all this is that it’s easy to lob grenades from the cheap seats or peanut gallery, but it’s damn hard to be in country, on the ground, and having to figure it out as you go along.
You can be opposed to the war all you like; it is a free country. But just because someone doesn’t share your opinion doesn’t make him a liar or a baby killer. We had enough of that B.S. in Viet Nam, and there’s no call for it today.
Debate facts and opinions all you want, but don’t smear a man just because he doesn’t see it your way. It’s as much a free country for him as it is for you.
The Piper
I’m suprised that you are indulging in all this name-calling, Piper. You said before that you were above that sort of cheap behavior.
You are a liar.
“Just because I’m willing to call MoveOn.org for the lying bunch of hating demagogues who knee-jerk (or is that goose step?) support it?”
You are getting a little frothy around the mouth, Piper. Losing your cool?
@69…S-Choir…
I’m in awe of your piercing wit and scintillating insights! Maybe instead of trying to bring you another POV or encourage you to engage in a meaningful dialogue, I should just bow to your obvious self-decided surperiority and come live in your broom closet and be your house boy?
Then again…maybe not…
MoveOn.org’s Petraeus ad was false, and even Democrats are distancing themselves from it. Don’t believe me? Name one prominent Democrat who endorses both what the ad said and the character assasination of Gen. Petraeus. Remember…I said prominent.
And the Jane Hasher example of totalitarian censorship, a hallmark of a goose-step mind, really speaks for itself.
When it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, has feathers like a duck, and quacks like a duck…guess what it is???
The Piper
@66
My god, is there no limit to how much you’ll embarrass yourself today?
Yes, the Iraqi government is a mess…name a government that isn’t.
The Iraqi government is in a state of disarray that is not matched by any other government on the planet. It’s not even close.
And yes the factions need to be prevented from warring with each other. But how would diplomacy alone prevent this?
By forging realistic agreements between the factions based upon the real desires of Iraqis. The major problems with how we’re approaching Iraqi reconciliation are that we’re demanding that they be resolutely anti-Iranian (unrealistic) and we’re also unwilling to give them actual control over how they handle oil revenues. If we want to solve the problems in Iraq, we have to recognize and work with both Iran and Syria in order to settle the political stalemates. The Bush Administration refuses to do this. At this point, no solution is a silver bullet, but we’re not even smart even to know how to load the damn gun.
You should know that I am a two-star, blue-star dad.
That does not mean that you know what you’re talking about.
My oldest did six-months in Kuwait just before the war, a year in Baghdad, and just returned from a special five-week assignment in Afghanistan. I genuinely mourn the loss of every American life, because both Iraq and Afghanistan affect me personally.
We all mourn the loss of American lives and we’re all affected by this personally. The fact that you have such a personal stake over there makes it even sadder that your willful ignorance makes it difficult for you to face reality over what’s happening.
But those maimed Iraqi children? Who maimed them? U.S. forces, or insurgents currently being egged-on by outside influences such as al-Quida or Iran?
All of the above, although you neglect to mention one major factor, insurgents backed by the Saudis.
Where do you get the notion I don’t like the First Amendment? Just because I’m willing to call MoveOn.org for the lying bunch of hating demagogues who knee-jerk (or is that goose step?) support it?
Are you saying that MoveOn doesn’t support the First Amendment? Do you want to back that up with some evidence or did you misplace your fake testicles?
Want to talk vicious censorship? Let me again encourage you to read what Jane Hamsher wrote about Elizabeth Edwards over at Arianna Huffington’s blog:
“So I guess we have to say it once again until everyone gets it — you never repeat right wing talking points to attack your own, ever. You never enter that echo chamber as a participant. Ever. You never give them a cudgel to beat the left with.
Just. Don’t. Do. It.”
She’s talking about strategy, you nitwit, not about taking away someone’s right to speak. My god, do you have any pride or self-respect? I realize that you’re posting anonymously, but doesn’t it bother you that you’re writing things this stupid on the internet?
Where are the pictures of piles upon piles of dead children’s body parts? You have them? Or do you only wish they existed…dead children, that is, so you could score political points in a MoveOn.org sort of way?
Do you really not believe that tens of thousands of Iraqi children have been killed in this conflict? Really?
Surprised you’re so boned at the Clinton News Network. I guess I learn something new every day.
If CNN is so pro-Democrat, then how come we got led into this war on a pile of bullshit when most Middle East experts knew it would be a fiasco? If CNN is so pro-Democrat, why do they have Glenn Beck on the air even though no one watches his crappy show? If CNN is so pro-Democrat, why is Lou Dobbs even allowed within 100 yards of their studio?
Thanks for being so delightfully absurd. You make it all so much fun!!!
Right back atcha, monkeyboy!
@68
Eisenhower’s management of the Allied coalition was as much politcal as military. Yet his willingeness to draw short toward the end of the war was, to him, military, but it ignored far reaching political considerations.
But he still did things that led to an eventual military victory, and he never acted in a way solely to provide political cover for Roosevelt while allowing an unwinnable war to get worse. Your comparison makes no sense with respect to what we’re talking about here. Are you really that stupid that you can’t figure that out?
You can be opposed to the war all you like; it is a free country. But just because someone doesn’t share your opinion doesn’t make him a liar or a baby killer. We had enough of that B.S. in Viet Nam, and there’s no call for it today.
Petraeus isn’t a baby killer, but he is a liar. He’s a very careful one, but he nonetheless bent the truth and twisted the numbers of what’s happening in Iraq enough that he is clearly a liar. I’ve presented evidence to show that, and you’ve just cried in your milk. As I said before, take off your skirt and step up to the plate.
@71
MoveOn.org’s Petraeus ad was false, and even Democrats are distancing themselves from it. Don’t believe me? Name one prominent Democrat who endorses both what the ad said and the character assasination of Gen. Petraeus. Remember…I said prominent.
Christopher Dodd. I’m sure the other folks here can name a few more.
#68
“You can be opposed to the war all you like; it is a free country. But just because someone doesn’t share your opinion doesn’t make him a liar or a baby killer. We had enough of that B.S. in Viet Nam, and there’s no call for it today.”
That sums up the propaganda of the right so beautifully, someone at the Rand Corporation would get downright misty upon reading it.
So, we should all be quiet, and watch as our Army slowly melts in Iraq, because the vaunted Gen. Patreus says victory is around the corner? The bullshit that we cannot leave Iraq, because we all know what would happen then, the dominoes would fall, and Iran would rule from Morocco to Pakistan. What fucking bullshit! Our incompetant President used 9/11 to rob a gas station and win re-election. Mission half accomplished there.
Listen good padre: WE WILL NEVER WIN THAT WAR!! IRAN WILL NEVER LET US!!! We are fighting the war that OBL and Iran have always dreamed of. Saddam was a hinderance to them, and now there is no counterweight to anything Iran wants to do. The day we invaded that country we completely and totally created a circular firing squad of our own interests in the region. Do you really think the Iraqi’s are going to lay down? They never will. Today’s alliance with the Sunni’s is temporary. They still hate us. Do you think they will ever forget what we did at Fallujah or Tikrit? The US Army will always be considered an enemy by Iraq’s Sunni sect.
You think Patreus does not know this? All he did was what every other General does, he tows the Bush line. Patreus, Franks, etc. They all say what the puppeteers at the Vice President’s office tells them to. How many lies do you need to hear before you get a clue?
And remember: do not look at how our political leadership, of both parties, hide behind the stars and bars of our Army.
They hide the fact that the whole war has been a big gas station robbery from Day 1.
You seem to know something about history, too bad you have not learned anything from it.
Sir, you have bitten into so much bullshit, you are starting to regurgitate it.
Holy crap, I agree with BDM. Somebody catch me, I believe I’m getting the vapors!
-OM
The fact that they have to have the general carry Bush’s water is bad enough. Does the fact that Bush has so little credibility matter to the right wingers? The general is used as a firewall because if it was Bush in front of congress they would rip him to shreds, and urinate on the pieces. Shreds I tell you.
Bush is answerable to no one. Well, since facts support ALL my positions, he may be answerable to the people that think the world is only 6,000 years old….. The Talibangelicals.
I AGREE WITH PIPER! STOP PICKING ON GENERAL PETRAEUS! YOU LIBERALS AND THOSE MOVEON.ORG LEFTISTS ARE SO MEAN!!! THEY PUT ADS IN LIBERAL NEWSPAPERS AT A DISCOUNT! IT’S SO UNFAIR!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!
YOU MEANIES WON’T GIVE THE PREZNIT A CHANCE!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH! JUST SIX MORE MONTHS!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAH!! WHO CARE ABOUT OSAMA BIN LADEN!!!! THE PREZNIT SAID HE’S NOT THAT CONCERNED ABOUT HIM!!!! WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHH! I TRUST THE PREZNIT BUT YOU LIBERALS ARE SO MEAN!!!
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHH!
“MoveOn.org’s Petraeus ad was false”
Assertion dismissed with extreme predjudice. The factual evidence in the ad has not been disputed. Everybody has keyed in on the header.
Don’t take this as a compliment, Piper, but you sound like Fraser’s little brother:
“I’m in awe of your piercing wit and scintillating insights!” The Pooper
What do you take in your latte … if you get my drift?
# 74 — The Poopers knowledge of history extends only to his college freshman U.S. History text. I could be wrong.
It might be the old Bircher Bible : ‘NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON!!!!’
Buckley called that book, “None dare call it bullshit” Shows how far the right has jumped off the cliff.
@75
Wow, I’m ready to fall over in shock too. I truly love the randomness here.
Piper needs to avoid coming too near an open flame.
@84 Strike that…he needs to explode. he posts so damn much crap I’m getting finger strain scrolling past him.