« Jenna Bush to be Married | Main | Tony Snow Stepping Down as Press Secretary »

CNN's Poll on Petraeus

There is no doubt there is a war being waged on General Petraeus by some on the left in anticipation of his September report. It is not all occurring on leftwing blogs either -- some of the activity is a little more nuanced. Radio Blogger takes a look at a CNN poll about the public's trust of Petraeus.

CNN released a new opinion poll today, and it appears that the slime campaign on General David Petraeus has now officially begun with a month to go before his report to Congress. CNN claimed on their Situation Room that only 28% of responders would be more likely to support the war if Petraeus reports the surge is showing signs of progress, 72% wouldn't. And worse news, if one were to believe this poll, only 43% of those polled trusted Petraeus to give an accurate report in September, while 53% said they don't trust the top U.S. military commander in Iraq.
Read it all.



TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/23439.

Comments (75)

Does that poll really "slim... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Does that poll really "slime" General Petraeus? There were two other questions that were not evaluated by the author (wonder why?) and those were:

Do you think the military is making gains? 47%-Yes

Do you think the Iraqi Government is making gains? 26%-Yes

Clearly what is driving the low favorables is the lack of any progress in Iraqi reconciliation and not because they dislike the General.

As a side note, I wonder what the results of the poll would be if the correct questions were answered such as: Do you trust the White House to give an accurate report?

Lorie, General Petraeus is ... (Below threshold)

Lorie, General Petraeus is brilliant on one hand, and could have been best used right from the start of the 2003 war. He is one of the most intellectual American generals ever.

On the other hand, his comment dismissing the GAO report on the 190,000 rifles and arms that are missing and presumed stolen or sold to insurgents or militia groups as some sort of "clerical error" concerned me. The GAO report found that very few times was a receipt used to accept arms shipments and only recently have thumbprints been used.

It is the duty of someone to take an active role in the security situation in Iraq to prevent needless civilian deaths so the "surge" to meet that important end is not a wrong idea. And I only wish eventual success to General Patraeus to make Iraq safer for the average person living there.

Somewhere McArthur, Patton,... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Somewhere McArthur, Patton, Eisenhower and others care collectively rolling over in their graves.

"CNN claimed on their Situa... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

"CNN claimed on their Situation Room that only 28% of responders would be more likely to support the war if Petraeus reports the surge is showing signs of progress, 72% wouldn't." Talk about misleading statements!!! That was not the question at all!


From the poll results: No effect on your view of the war 72%

That means no effect whether you supported the war or did not. In an earlier question on whether your mind was made up on the war (pro or con) the total was 68%.

So that disingenuous little fup purposefully misrepresented the results of the post to "slime" CNN and the will of the people of the US!

I may have missed something... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

I may have missed something but I thought it was the White House that doesn't trust Petraeus to write his own frank, maybe too frank report. We have learned in the last few days "the document (the Petraeus report) would not be written by the Army general but instead would come from the White House, with input from Petraeus, Crocker and other administration officials."

Didn't Bush say the problem with Vietnam war, was that the White House was always micro managing the General's decisions?..Here is one quote..


Bush: The thing about the Vietnam War that troubles me, as I look back, was it was a political war. We had politicians making military decisions and it is a lesson that any president must learn.

The question about the gene... (Below threshold)

The question about the generic commander of American forces:

"Do you trust him to report what's really going on in Iraq without making the situation sound better than it actually is, or don't you feel that way?"

Clear as mud.

What possible reason(s) wou... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

What possible reason(s) would the American public possibly have to be cynical? Must be a conspiracy by the obvious left wing media...certainly nothing...ever..from the White House

"The insurgency in Iraq is in the last throes"
Vice President Dick Cheney...June 20, 2005

Steve, Steve, Steve; this i... (Below threshold)
kim:

Steve, Steve, Steve; this is a political document, not a military decision. Surely you see the difference. Why confound it?
==============================

Look, Nogo Al Qaeda support... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

Look, Nogo Al Qaeda supporter, I'm not going to bother looking up the exact quote that you evilly misrepresented above, but when the Vice President said that he was clearly stating his opinion. He was not stating a fact. (And yes I know you leftists lack the ability to distinguish between the two, but still...)

And most likely, the insurgency would have been in it's last throes, had the terrorist not receive so much support and encouragement from you and the rest of your kind.

Don't you just love it when... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Don't you just love it when the moonbats smell something good coming how they start to trash it months ahead of time. Hilliarious!!!
You know just maybe old "Hoosie" should set up a game plan for the whole world. Man he is so full of himself.

I wonder if the people poll... (Below threshold)
HERMIE:

I wonder if the people polled actually KNOW who Petraeus is? I wonder if they can even spell Petraeus?

And most likely, the ins... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

And most likely, the insurgency would have been in it's last throes, had the terrorist not receive so much support and encouragement from you and the rest of your kind.
Exactly the point! When AlQ is in trouble, they will massacre Iraqui people for (the dem) congress and their liberal enablers .

barnetGRUBBLE:... (Below threshold)
marc:

barnetGRUBBLE:

Does that poll really "slime" General Petraeus? There were two other questions that were not evaluated by the author (wonder why?) and those were:

Ok lets look; 1. "Do you think the military is making gains? 47%-Yes"

Assuming that # is anywhere close to true it directly flys in the face of many people doesn't it. People like Sen. "War is Lost" Reid and many others.

One would think that number should be in the twenties but apparently not.

2. "Do you think the Iraqi Government is making gains? 26%-Yes"

Why would you think the author (radio blogger) would have to analyze those results?

Generally it seems to be a fair number all things considered. BTW, you and your ilk have been crowing about the Iraqi Gov "on vacation" you have to wonder how this happens while "on vacation."

A more interesting question you should have asked: The poll queried just over a 1000 people.

Why on some of the questions were only half that number asked? For what reason? How did it effect the results?

Ya know Paul...it is simpli... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

Ya know Paul...it is simplistic..devoid of thought responses like your stating I support terrorists simply because I question our President...

I find it predictable...

as for Cheney and last throes just google..
oh yeah check out the only time Cheney was right
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BEsZMvrq-I

and for those who will clai... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

and for those who will claim "fake"

Cheney shrugs off 1994 remarks about Iraq
RAW STORY
Published: Thursday August 16, 2007




Print This Email This
after this surfaced..

"A local CBS affiliate who called Vice President Cheney's office asking why Cheney said in 1994 that the US should not invade Iraq actually got a reply.

"He was not Vice President at the time, it was after he was Secretary of Defense," a spokesperson told CBS 5 San Francisco. "I don't have any comment.""

because I question our P... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

because I question our President...
Surprised that you didn't care enought to question our congressional leaders Reid/Pelosi, who seemed to announce our military as failure whenever the terrorists blew up more Iraqui women/children.
And now the liberal left seems to be more interested in discrediting Petraeus than condemning the terrorists' massacres. You seem to be doing the same here.

Nogo, Is there a s... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Nogo,
Is there a significant event between 1994 and 2007? What have the liberal dems said about Iraq and Saddam from 1998-2003?

Nogo, The real ques... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Nogo,
The real question for you is this. Do you want to withdraw the troops from Iraq now regardless of what Petraeus is going to report?

marc, one response is under... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

marc, one response is understandable but the other is not? To have less than half the US believe that we are making military progress after 4 1/2 - years of an occupation is not a good thing.

A sample size of 1,000 and even 500 is statistically valid based on the population and the response percentages. My guess is that they split the sample to run a validation on the responses. Both groups were asked the same questions, and the results were compared. If both groups responded within the margin or error, then only one of the sample results would be presented.

CNN is simply caught in ano... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

CNN is simply caught in another less-than-honest push polling despite all the liberal spin

-------------------------------------
Show us the political ideology of who the half sample is, and the political ideology of the full sample size, and show a little transparency in the polling process if you want it to be believed. It's hard to take a poll seriously when on the one hand, 50% can support the war or say they're open minded to change their mind, and then in the next breath say 72% wouldn't change their mind on Iraq regardles of what General Petraeus might say, because most people don't trust him anyway. It's a contradiction that busts this poll. CNN ought to have seen if it they wanted to be fair, but then again, CNN is not in the fair business.

Why don't you tell us Brave... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Why don't you tell us Brave Sir Robin? Remember that Bush was asked "What did Iraq have to do with 9-11" his response was "Nothing".

So, tell us what happened between '98 and '03? By 2002 the weapon inspectors were back in business and Saddam had complied with the no fly zone, so what do you got?

Also, in a Meet the Press interview in 2000, Cheney said that an invasion of Iraq would lead to a quagmire!

You can look it up yourself... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

You can look it up yourself, Sir Genocide lover. It has been posted quite a few times.

I assume that you want to withdraw the troops now so that AlQ can commit more genocide.

All predicted BS from the l... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

All predicted BS from the left aside, this is just the beginning of what any thinking (that leaves out the local trolls, Barney, Nogo et al) indiviudal knows is going to happen. The left must demean the General so they have a reason for not accepting news from the front by someone from the front. Harry Reed and Nasty Pelousy get their information from the Washington Post, New York Times and the Daily Kos. They do not need to listen to what the man in charge in the theater of operation has to say unless it agrees with their preconceived notions about what the Party of Judas need to win in the next election. Shameful bastards all.

"and then in the next breat... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

"and then in the next breath say 72% wouldn't change their mind "

Brave Sir Robin, let me explain this to you again. The poll indicated 68% of the respondents had made up their mind on the war, so for 72% to say that the report would not change their mind is within a 4% margin of error of the 68%.

If the report came back that we were not making any significant progress would you change your opinion?

Now if they only asked, or tabulated, that question to those persons that responded as still open to influence that would result in a different finding, but since that segment of the population is so small, it does not matter.

I can't resist this one Her... (Below threshold)
JFO:

I can't resist this one Hermie because apparently a Wizbang author doesn't know how to spell his name:

"General Patraeus' Impressive Approval Ratings
Posted by Kim Priestap
Published: Aug 15, 07 10:05 PM"

So, according to your reasoning Kim, doesn't really know who he is. Pretty funny, eh?

Sir Genocide Lover, it is a... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Sir Genocide Lover, it is a nice sample to use. CNN is caught in another less than honest push-polling to discredit Petraeus. Again, anything to advocate withdrawal of troops from Iraq even if a genocide occurs.

------------------------------
Favor/mind made up 21%
Oppose/mind made up 47%

Love America is absolutely ... (Below threshold)
Buckeye:

Love America is absolutely right. To use just that portion of the respondents that prove your point is ludricrous. I wish the people would pay attention to the way the questions are asked and the makeup of the respondents. Polls are usually weighted in favor of the liberal left just as the news is.

Sir Genocide Lover, since y... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Sir Genocide Lover, since you love to make up nick-name, so I will try Chairman Barn-Tse-Tung. I hope you are happy with that name (20 million people killed is a good enough genocide for you).

Props to the Senator from T... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

Props to the Senator from Texas...
But hey...how can you not despise a Commander-in-chief that allows this to happen on HIS watch?
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5061221.html

Props to the Senator fro... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Props to the Senator from Texas...
But hey...how can you not despise a Commander-in-chief that allows this to happen on HIS watch?

Yes, by all means, the fact that the Navy is "out of stock" of Purple Hearts is ALL Bush's fault for not refilling the order that he should have been doing ahead of, oh, say, running the country, meeting foreign leaders, fighting a war, etc.

Honestly, I'd like to give ... (Below threshold)
pennywit:

Honestly, I'd like to give the general another six months, at least, to see what he comes up with. By most of the reports, the troop surge and the tactic of negotiating with some of the insurgents (now Valuable Allies Against Al-Qaida In Iraq) are both things I wish we had done three years ago.

If there's a chance Petraeus can make things work, then he really needs to be given time and resources to do it.

There's even a small part of me pondering whether it would be better to stay in Iraq through at least Feb. 2009 at least so the new president, of whatever party, can shape policy there.

--|PW|--

Nothing is Bush's Fault...<... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

Nothing is Bush's Fault...
02/15/04
"I'm a war president. I make decisions here in the Oval Office in foreign-policy matters with war on my mind. Again, I wish it wasn't true, but it is true. And the American people need to know they got a president who sees the world the way it is."

It was Bush...no one else that gave the order to invade...the fact we have over 29,000 wounded and have a shortage of purple hearts is in fact at his feet,,,

But hey...purple hearts are meaningless...I remember smiling faces wearing purple band-aids at the 2004 Republican Convention....

I don't care if any of you support the vision of our President...but...stay away from supporting our President... AND pretending to support our troops over there...and More importantly....when they come home...

Trolls.. no matter how ya c... (Below threshold)
Ran:

Trolls.. no matter how ya cut it.. "Invested in failure" damn shame.

Brave Sir Robin, you can ca... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Brave Sir Robin, you can call me anything want. I do not care. You are Vietnamese and when you had a chance to fight the Commies and take back your country you choose to run away just like the character I have labeled you with.

You are quick to blame the Democrats for the genocide in Cambodia, and the above China, but what did you do to prevent that except flee to the US and complain?

PS, you don't know shit about polling, sampling or statistics.

Nogo, how do you feel about... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Nogo, how do you feel about a President who allowed Ruby Ridge and Waco to occure during his watch. Are you as disgusted with his failure? You are a farce along with the rest of your left leaning lying pieces of dog shit.

Barney, what a racist A$$Ho... (Below threshold)
Ran:

Barney, what a racist A$$Hole! I knew that was coming, crawl back to KKKos. I was in Nam, your DEMS cost millions to die! but you embrace them! Put your lame A$$ up against 4 or 5 guys wanting to kill you, and you'd be playing the "Feet don't fail me now!" tune. And save the John Wayne crap, I don't believe you.

Seriously my last post for ... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

Seriously my last post for the day....

This man was appointed by Bush...and is leaving..his reason?

"Nicholson said he wants to return to the private sector. "This coming February, I turn 70 years old, and I feel it is time for me to get back into business, while I still can."

Hey...screw the vet I want to make some money...

...by the way this came from the Govt V.A. site


We vets know what is going on...and damn right we vote...

Ya all finish this thread...

LoveAmerica Immigrant: Don'... (Below threshold)
Ran:

LoveAmerica Immigrant: Don't dignify that punk's comment by responding.

Ok one more..."you piece of... (Below threshold)
nogo war:

Ok one more..."you piece of dog shit"
...
Ya know it is no big thing for someone to call me Al-Q....no big deal as it is not generally offenive
however
I ask the moderators to ban this dog shit person...
unless
of course
this is a phrase you do not feel
crosses the line....

Ran, You are right,... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Ran,
You are right, that punk is not worth the time. We all know who he is.

Why is no one talking about... (Below threshold)
Buckhunter:

Why is no one talking about this Opinion Reasearch Corp. that provides CNN's polling. Are we going to let them get away with this crap?

OMAHA, Neb. & PRINCETON, N.J.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Aug. 4, 2006--infoUSA Inc. (Nasdaq: IUSA), the leading provider of business and consumer information products, database marketing services, data processing services and sales and marketing solutions, today announced that it has entered into a definitive merger agreement under which it will acquire Opinion Research Corporation (Nasdaq: ORCI) for $12.00 per share in cash.

According to the New York Times, Mr. Gupta's company...

paid $146,866 to ferry the Clintons, Mr. Gupta and others to Acapulco and back, court records show. During the next four years, infoUSA paid Mr. Clinton more than $2 million for consulting services, and spent almost $900,000 to fly him around the world for his presidential foundation work and to fly Mrs. Clinton to campaign events.

"I ask the moderators to ba... (Below threshold)
Ran:

"I ask the moderators to ban this dog shit person..." Confused here, you asking to be banned?

how do you feel about a ... (Below threshold)

how do you feel about a President who allowed Ruby Ridge...

Not meaning to do the work for the trolls, but didn't Ruby Ridge happen on Bush 41's watch?

Buck, That 's good ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Buck,
That 's good info. The liberal leftists are up to their usual tricks again as they did in VN: genocide for Indochina, genocide for the Jews, and now genocide for Iraq?

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=3392BA16-BD30-4305-ADEA-BBCC1BE12564

Does anyone wonder where the Tom Hayden-Jane Fonda SDS radicals went? The ones who chanted "Hey, hey LBJ how many kids did you kill today?" and cheered on the Communists in Vietnam, and went into the streets to demand America's withdrawal from Vietnam and became suddenly silent when our troops were pulled and the Communists proceeded to slaughter two-and-a half million Cambodians and Vietnamese? Well today they are the heart and soul of the Democratic Party, calling for a capitulation in the war in Iraq and referring to George Bush as Hitler, or perhaps merely suggesting that his mentality is fascist, while insisting and that America's war in Iraq is a mask for conquest and imperial goals.


These aging New Lefties are also busy digging graves for the Jews in the Middle East by pretending that the genocidal Muslims in the Palestinian territories are really victims and that they only express genocidal desires because they're frustrated and reduced to desperation by American and Israeli power. The lefties I'm referring to are grouped around magazines like the Nation and the American Prospect and websites like Daily Kos and Common Dreams; their organizations are among the netroots and Democratic Party caucuses like the "Campaign for America's Future," which are mandatory stations on the road to the White House for the current crop of Democratic presidential candidates.


Barney ought to be banned f... (Below threshold)
SPQR:

Barney ought to be banned for his repeated despicable insults as the ones above are not the first of this series.

Hey Ran, how did the Dems c... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

Hey Ran, how did the Dems costs million of lives? Also, there was no more brutal regime than the Nazis, but did the French run away or did some go underground and keep up the fight against impossible odds?

All I am asking is how a Vietnamese can come over here and call me genocide appeaser when he had chance to fight the good fight yet he choose to run away?

Simple question.

Nogo,Ya k... (Below threshold)
Son Of The Godfather:

Nogo,

Ya know it is no big thing for someone to call me Al-Q....no big deal as it is not generally offenive

Well, that just screams volumes, don't it?

Hey Ran, how did t... (Below threshold)
Son Of The Godfather:
Hey Ran, how did the Dems costs million of lives? Also, there was no more brutal regime than the Nazis, but did the French run away or did some go underground and keep up the fight against impossible odds?

All I am asking is how a Vietnamese can come over here and call me genocide appeaser when he had chance to fight the good fight yet he choose to run away?

Simple question.

The only thing simple here is your comprehension of history and the ramifications of not learning from it.

Nogo, I call them as I see ... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Nogo, I call them as I see them. Actually suggesting there is any similarities between you and K9 excreatment demean the doggie poop. Oddly, being pro al Qaeda does not bother you much at all. I guess when you are what you react to. I wonder if any of the MSM will remember Gen. Petraeus was approved without a nay vote in the Senate? Seems there is another big problem. Congressman Baird from Wash. State was a person who voted against the authorization for the use of military force to remove Saddam. Seems, after a visit to Iraq, he has changed his stance. That will drive the left crazier.

Also, there was no more ... (Below threshold)

Also, there was no more brutal regime than the Nazis

What about the darling of the Left, Stalin? Think he killed more people than Hitler.

Chairman Mao was quite brutal too.

Barney, besides being a des... (Below threshold)
SPQR:

Barney, besides being a despicable person, your ignorance of history is getting more annoying.

Well said, Son of... Google... (Below threshold)
Ran:

Well said, Son of... Google's a racist. And a damn shallow one at that. Why do I know he wasn't in the thick of things over there? cuz he talk's out his A$$. LoveAmerica Immigrant knows full well what was left of South VN after we bailed on them.

LOL!!! SPQR Shoots!.. HE SC... (Below threshold)
Ran:

LOL!!! SPQR Shoots!.. HE SCORES!

barneyGRUBBLE:... (Below threshold)
marc:

barneyGRUBBLE:

marc, one response is understandable but the other is not? To have less than half the US believe that we are making military progress after 4 1/2 - years of an occupation is not a good thing.

Not understandable? What were the numbers to a similar question say 6 months ago GRUBBLE. Without looking I'd bet they were significantly less.

GRUBBLE:

PS, you don't know shit about polling, sampling or statistics.

Soooo... that presumes you do to be able to judge others knowledge.

Then you shouldn't have any problems explaining my original question: What effect on the poll did only asking some questions of half of those polled?

"Then you shouldn't have an... (Below threshold)
BarneyG2000:

"Then you shouldn't have any problems explaining my original question: What effect on the poll did only asking some questions of half of those polled?"

Marc, see #19, you run a split sample to validate the results as true or significant. You split the sample 50/50 before you start the poll. You designate one sample the control and the other as the test. You ask the same questions to both, but only report on one of the samples after proving the results are significant to a certain percentage (usually between (90% to 95% on polls).

It is good to see that you are paying attention.

Pennywit:"By mo... (Below threshold)

Pennywit:

"By most of the reports, the troop surge and the tactic of negotiating with some of the insurgents (now Valuable Allies Against Al-Qaida In Iraq) are both things I wish we had done three years ago."

However - I don't think we could have done that. I think that the 'invader/crusader' meme was so imbedded that the current effort would not have been successful, especially considering the propaganda and 'help' neighboring countries were very eager to offer.

We had to let them have what they 'wanted' - 'heroes' to come in and help 'liberate' them from the 'oppressive United States' and incidentially let their particular sect carve out a piece of the action. And when they saw those heroes were killing the Iraqi people in wholesale lots, regardless of ideology, all of a sudden the idea of cooperating with each other as Iraqis, unifying against people who wanted to kill them regardless of what sect they belonged to, with the help of the Al Ameriki tribe.

The Iraqi people know now who their friends are, and it ain't the folks next door in Iran and Syria...

Wow!.. the trolls are out i... (Below threshold)
Ran:

Wow!.. the trolls are out in full force!..(Invested in defeat!)

Aw, hell. It should have b... (Below threshold)

Aw, hell. It should have been...

"And when they saw those heroes were killing the Iraqi people in wholesale lots, regardless of ideology, all of a sudden the idea of cooperating with each other as Iraqis, unifying against people who wanted to kill them regardless of what sect they belonged to, with the help of the Al Ameriki tribe (who made it plain that when they were no longer needed, they'd be gone - as opposed to Zawahiri and Zarqawi who showed they weren't going to leave, and were going to kill as many Iraqis as it took to 'drive out the occupier'.

Then you had Al-Sadr and his henchmen, inflicting a very repressive form of Islam on the people, and dragging those they figured weren't Islamic off to torture. THIS sort of crap wasn't what they were expecting after Saddam fell - niehter were they expecting car bombs targeting marketplaces, or insurgents targeting children.

They chose the devil they thought they knew over one they feared, only to find the devil they thought they knew was far, far worse than anything they could have imagined.

They came late to their knowledge, but the Iraqi people know now who their friends are, and it ain't the folks next door in Iran and Syria...

Of course, we could still pull a Viet Nam on them - promise them support as the troops leave, and then yank the rug out at the appropriate time. But right now, the Iraqi people realize the Americans want to help them to get on their feet - while everyone else offering to 'help' wants them flat on the ground with a boot on their neck.

RE: Nogo #14: "devoid o... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

RE: Nogo #14: "devoid of thought responses like your stating I support terrorists simply because I question our President..."

Nogo,

The leftists who post here are famous for some pretty delusional comments when they find themselves in a place where spin alone will not suffice, but that comment takes the cake.

What you and your leftists comrades post here goes well beyond questioning the President. You may not want to support Al Qaeda, but that does not in any way automatically mean that what you leftists say and do does not support Al Qaeda.

How many times have you, Nogo, linked to the body count website? Now I'm not saying that the dead should be ignored. It is a fact of war and not something to be taken lightly. But the left use them as propaganda. Deplorable. Did it ever occur to you that strapping bombs to yourself and blowing yourself up in a public place would be pointless if the left did not use it to try to demoralize the good guys?

When you do what you do, Nogo, you support Al Qaeda. You might not want to, or mean to, but you do.

When the broadcast networks decide that they have to call it a civil war, because after all Al Qaeda working so hard to make it look like a civil war, that supports Al Qaeda. They may not intentionally want to support Al Qaeda, but they do.

When, almost from the start you leftists repeated the unsubstantiated opinion that Saddam Hussein had no WMD nor the capability to manufacture them over and over until it became "conventional wisdom"--in an effort to de-legitimize the war--you supported Al Qaeda.

When you take isolated incidents, misrepresent them, and blow them way out of proportion you support Al Qaeda.

When you say Bush was behind the 9/11 attacks ('cause you can't melt steel with fire after all), or knew about them and let them happen anyway you support Al Qaeda.

When you fabricate stories that make the terrorists look good or the US look bad and publish them as if they really happened, you support Al Qaeda.

When you say that we went to war to control and take Iraq's oil or to make Halliburton rich you support Al Qaeda.

I could go on and on...

And now, as the post above illustrates, you begin a campaign to discredit General Patreas in the weeks before he return to report on the real situation in Iraq, you are supporting Al Qaeda.

If you want to protest the war or "question" George Bush or whatever--go right ahead. That's the American way. But you and the rest of the left, including bloggers, politicians, the press, educators, etc. had best figure out a way to do it that does not support Al Qaeda or you'd all best pour yourselves a tall glass of shut the fuck up.

Nogo is the one who claimed... (Below threshold)
SPQR:

Nogo is the one who claimed it was immoral that the US did not let Al Queda come to the US to kill civilians.

Uh oh. The monkey patrol's... (Below threshold)
LAB:

Uh oh. The monkey patrol's favorite show's been canceled! What's an ook ook to do on a Friday night?!

The liberals here have prov... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

The liberals here have proven themselves hypocrites: they are racist (witness the attack against Rice for example) and full of personal insults when running out of arg. They don't like their own args or tactics when it is applied to them.

The good news is that even some Dems in Congress at least have more decency than the liberals on this thread

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/011581.php
Another Congressional Democrat has shifted his views on Iraq to support from opposition -- and this change has significance. Rep. Brian Baird, one of the Democrats who voted against the authorization to use military force in 2002, has now returned from Iraq convinced that we need to give General David Petraeus more time:
...
Baird made it plain that his change of heart is based on two very clear criteria. One, a pullback would devastate Iraq and be catastrophic to the region and our national interests. Primarily, though, Baird believes that Petraeus has made real progress. He does not want to pull out while success can still be achieved.

Looks like the libtard trol... (Below threshold)
Son Of The Godfather:

Looks like the libtard trolls have figured out how to game the Wizbang comment ranking system... hey, kinda like real life when they let dead people, illegal immigrants, and convicted felons vote!

I believe there are some ra... (Below threshold)

I believe there are some ranking Democrats who put Party far ahead of Country. Their reasons may vary - whether it's to accumulate and wield power (for their or our own good - what's good for the Democratic Party is good for the USA) or whether it's simple team loyalty can be argued indefinitely.

I believe there's also Democrats who look at what the Democratic Party has morphed into, and secretly (or in the case of Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman, not so secretly) despair of their party ever getting outside the control of the loudest special interest groups, who would gladly twist everything in our society around to serve their own interests, and make their desires the mandatory law of the land.

For quite a while now it's been the ones who have support from the 'squeaky wheels' (you know the old saying, 'the squeaky wheel gets the grease'?) who have gained prominence. You see Pelosi and Reid as examples - for all their talk about reform and change, the substance in their promises has been extremely scanty, and the volumes of rhetoric they've been spouting haven't been sufficient to hide that from folks who've been paying attention.

And they made such a stink and made so many promises prior to the elections, it's not at all surprising that people actually watched them to see whether they kept the promises or not.

Also - there's still a lot of people who remember what the Democrats did to Viet Nam in '75, even within the Party, who don't want to see it happen again. And Pelosi-Reid seemed pretty damn determined to make sure it happened again. Which makes you wonder - are they incapable of seeing the historic parallel?

Another poke at this less-t... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Another poke at this less-than-honest-poll. One comment is exactly the same point we all made here.

http://www.julescrittenden.com/2007/08/17/poll-americans-want-to-
win/#comment-25097

I used to give people the benefit of the doubt about their desire for world peace, but I no longer do so. There is ample evidence that the philosophy of the left not only doesn't lead to world peace, but is actually the cause behind the ineffable suffering and death of unfathomable numbers of people who have lived the philosophy. No honest person wants to continue actions that inexorably lead to that kind of suffering-not and claim that it will somehow lead to world peace. I've begun to think that the peace they speak of is the peace of the grave. Consider how people continue to denigrate the Industrial Revolution and capitalism, and praise socialism (in whatever form it takes). The first has produced more life-giving progress in the last 200 years than in all of human history. The latter has built Everests of corpses.

If memory serves me right... (Below threshold)

If memory serves me right Gen. Petraeus was in charge of training the Iraqi troops. After more than four years and 19 billion dollars they aren`t trained yet. He was also in charge when 190,000 weapons fell into the hands or the enemy. It seems to me this man has failed in his original mission. This falls right in line with the Bush administrations practice of rewarding failure. He should have just awarded him the Medal of freedom and put another general in charge to run his war.

P Buntan"I could g... (Below threshold)
JFO:

P Buntan

"I could go on and on." That's news? You have more hot air than Death Valley.

Karas:He shoul... (Below threshold)
marc:

Karas:

He should have just awarded him the Medal of freedom and put another general in charge to run his war.

Who was it that unanimously confirmed the General?

Or are you and your dem friends unwilling to share in the blame?

Everests of corpses, enough... (Below threshold)
kim:

Everests of corpses, enough to fill Death Valley.
=======================

You know, the left's behavi... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

You know, the left's behavior during the Viet Nam era makes sense to me. After all, people were being drafted to fight against the left's own ideology. I can understand why they wanted the communists to win.

But the leftists today make no sense. They should be on our side in this particular fight. They should want us to win. It sure doesn't appear that way to me.

I understand their desire for power to push their ideology on us all and to regress human values and stagnate human development (even though in their minds it's "progressive" and "liberal" to do so), but what they're doing in this instance is the entirely wrong way to go about it.

Come to think of it, that's typical of them-- isn't it?

I just don't see any explan... (Below threshold)
kim:

I just don't see any explanation for it, PB, but terminal cognitive dissonance. Just try to get a leftist to make sense of his position re: the middleast, sharia, joos, democracy, etc. BDS, or something, has just scrambled all their brains. The good ones recognize the inconsistency, but mumble. The bad ones are either too stupid to understand the disconnect, or so corrupt they don't care.
===========================

P Bunyan -"They... (Below threshold)

P Bunyan -

"They should be on our side in this particular fight. They should want us to win. It sure doesn't appear that way to me."

It depends on what you call a 'win'. There's about as many end states that would be considered a 'win' as there are parties to this conflict - and the radical left's 'win' scenario only tangentally approaches what we'd consider a 'win' which would provide a maximum amount of freedom to a maximum number of people and cultures.

If a win by (dare I say it) Western civilization, with the rise of the attendant freedoms of thought and expression, and the destruction of the picturesque intolerant and repressive structures of radical Islam is the alternative to their preferred 'win' where they manage to control what's considered to be 'freedom', then they'd rather lose. It's very short-term thinking, but based on my observations of the last 30 years or so the left and a good number of the Democratic Party can't quite seem to forecast and comprehend the long-term effects of what they want to do, at least no effects further along than the next election. (I still laugh sadly at the hullabloo behind the 'Luxury Tax' on yachts and light aircraft in the early '90s. It damn near killed off both industries, and cost about twice as much to implement than it collected. But hey, who doesn't want to 'soak the rich'? And how better to do it than by laying heavy taxes on what 'rich' people buy? The only thing was - people didn't NEED to buy those luxury items, and didn't.)

So they don't see a 'loss' in Iraq as anything other than a device they can use for political gain. The long-term ramifications of a loss aren't immediately, in-your-face and unignoreably apparent, and thus just don't matter to them.

When we have some of the bi... (Below threshold)
SteveB:

When we have some of the bitter enemies of President Bush and the War saying that the General's tactics during the surge are making great strides, it should be obvious as to how well things are going. But the left's classic tactic is when they cannot argue with the facts, they will attempt to discredit the messenger. ABCNEWS leads a story "Is the Surge Report a Lie?", just to plant doubts, when you read the comments from people calling him Betray-us etc. The Left's Bush Derangement Syndrome, combined with their hatred of the Military is going to be in full display.

Lorie, why does this have t... (Below threshold)
WallyWojo:

Lorie, why does this have to be an attack on Petraeus? If the citizens of this country were getting his feedback it would be different,but instead we will be offered the filtered report complete with white house talking points and plenty of spin. This is why the large numbers do not trust it, there is no trust left with this administration. If you do trust them, I would just suggest doing some further reading.

Just because Bushie has an ... (Below threshold)
Bob Pomeroy:

Just because Bushie has an agenda doesn't mean that we have to join in lock step. Of course the report will be positive, that's his job. Our job is much more mundane than that and we don't seem to be getting much help from bushie, so p on him.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy