« Phony interviewer again investigated by ABC News | Main | Truth In Labeling »

Why The Left Fears Petraeus

I do not know if there is really a Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy or not, despite the constant admonitions from people connected with the Clintons. But this past week has certainly verified that the Left has such a machine. The New York Times breaks the law and its own policies in order to run a full-page character assassination on General Petraeus by a group known for its strong and increasing influence in Democrat affairs, and no leading Democrat is willing to denounce it for the vicious smear it so obviously is. Indeed, Schumer goes so far as to claim we must thank terrorist warlords for the decrease in violence, and Hillary Clinton states that it would take a "willing suspension of disbelief" (a phrase commonly associated with fiction) to accept the sworn testimony of a career military officer and combat veteran, who was unanimously confirmed by the Senate in his role. A certain duck colleague of Bugs Bunny will need a new stage name, because the Left has laid a firm claim on "Daffy"!

But aside from pointing out the obvious, what is the deal with the Left's hysteria? Although it's well known that they have a psychotic reaction to the President and anything he says or does, the Left usually lets the President speak before they blow up. Shoot, they hate Rove but don't go out and campaign in the media against him, so there's a special emotion going on in the hard little rocks which serve as hearts in the Left, where General David Petraeus is concerned.

That emotion is fear. Raw, powerful, growing fear.

Recognizing this fact, we would reasonably next wonder why the Left fears Petraeus so much. And I have an idea.

California.

It all comes back to the 2008 elections. The Democrats have done very well for themselves over the years in politics. They are the acknowledged masters in most local and Congressional races, especially in major cities and the large states. But they have never been able to lock up the White House. Oh sure, they win every so often, but not as often as they expect, and never in the kind of numbers they think should happen. And rather than examine the problem critically, with an eye to root causality and a logical response, the Left takes a very emotional perspective, and demands that the world act on the orders from Never-Never-Land. Or DNC headquarters, which tries hard to play the role of Tinkerbell. While Bill Clinton won 2 times in 1992 and 96, he never got a majority. Only two of the last seven Presidents have been Democrats. And the Donks have not out and out stomped the GOP candidate since 1964. So the White House race is always dicey for the Left, and this time is no exception.

- continued -


So what's the deal with California? History, for one. Cali is worth 55 Electoral Votes, more than 20 percent of the tally needed to be elected President. So that's big right there. But what's even more important is that the GOP does not need California, but the Democrats do. Dubya won twice without California, but in the last 9 times that the Democrats lost California, they only won the White House twice.

Also, California is on the move. W. took 44.4% of the Cali vote in 2004, 41.7% in 2000, Dole took 38.2% in 1996, and Bush I took 32.6% in 1992. See the trend?

Sure, it would be a real surprise if California got into play for 2008 but if it does, the Democrats are done. Period. End of story. So the Donks cannot afford to lose Cali. The problem is, Cali is not all Democrat, not by a long shot, and the trend is to close the gap.

There's a lot of military people from California. Catch a Padres game on an afternoon in San Diego, and you will see a sea of Navy in the bleachers. The Army still has the Presidio in San Francisco, and the Marines come from all over Cali. And besides the bases, there's the military families. The Democrats played a gamble, when they decided to oppose the War. They figured the GOP owned the pro-war side, so they could try to neutralize it by flashing patriotism of their own or else they could try to play against the war, and from 2002 on that was their game. They're one-for-three in elections on that strategy. But that election gave them both Houses of Congress and they felt strong for 2008, so they doubled-down on the Anti-War effort, with all the major Donk candidates shoving each other to prove themselves the biggest opponent to the war. When General Petraeus came up for a vote, it seemed a sure thing that extra troops would mean higher casualties, more to use against President Bush, and when General Petraeus came back to report, he'd be admitting disaster and thus serve the Democrats well.

The reality was a bit different. The surge is working, so well in fact that the Democrats are desperately worried that it looks like we are winning. And winning not only would take away the 'War-Monger' card to play on the public All those Democrats who were on the record as saying we could not win, well they'd look weak and spineless at best. And every single Democrat running for the Oval Office could and would be painted as a defeatist. There was but one, desperate hope. A foul, nasty, dirty little trick of a hope, but the Democrats devoured eagerly and made it their identity. Just as they had misrepresented the war and its conduct for years, so now the Democrats turned on the leading figure in that war, General Petraeus. Never mind that they themselves had unanimously approved the man. Never mind that the troops found him eminently credible and a fit leader. Never mind that on his watch, entire regions of Iraq had become manageable and countless lives saved, military and civilian both. It was far more expedient to the Democrats to sacrifice the last vestige of their honor, than to accept the consequences of their earlier deceit and treachery. Having subtly demeaned and maligned the troops already in many separate decisions, it was just one more step to take that step into public derision of the military.

While things have been difficult for the GOP in recent times, it must be remembered that to keep the White House, they only need to hold the states they have. And winning in Iraq improves those odds for the Republican candidate and hurts the Democrat. But states with heavy military populations, are truly wild cards, and if the Democrats' war-hate gamble fails, states like California could flip and make the race a laugher for the Republican. If Petraeus is believed by the average American, the Democrat will not be supported in the election. So they fear him, because the consequences of their decision are more ominous for their personal egos than they ever imagined possible.


TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/24115.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Why The Left Fears Petraeus:

Comments (64)

I remember when General Wes... (Below threshold)

I remember when General Westmoreland gave an optimistic report to Congress about "winning" the Vietnam War in 1967. A few years later I was required by law to apply to the Selective Service and get my Vietnam War draft card. America has heard it all before from an optimistic general, and years later we're still stuck in the same quagmire. Some things just never change.

Livin' Large in the past PH... (Below threshold)
epador:

Livin' Large in the past PH, huh?

This isn't Vietnam, Paul.</... (Below threshold)
yo:

This isn't Vietnam, Paul.

Remember? McCarther gave a similar assessment in WWII regarding the Philippines.

I can't recall, but did he return, or not?

It's what generals do. To compare Westmoreland and Petreaus and come to your conclusion denotes a sorry-assed and convenient knowledge of history.

Well, if you want to compare the left's continual kicking the shins of our military, well, maybe you have a point.

At least we don't have hippies calling our returning troops "baby-killers' this go 'round.

By the way, in order to stick a fork in the "We lost Vietnam" BS. You can buy a Big Mac in Hanoi. I'm thinking we won that war.

Yes, they are running scare... (Below threshold)

Yes, they are running scared to death of any success on the ground in Iraq, which is precisely why they are desperately trying to surrender and get out before the military can stabilize the security situation and before the Iraqis reach political accommodation. They need defeat and disaster, and they need it in time to blame it all on Bush.

However, Democrats have not run on an antiwar platform nationally yet. In 2004, Kerry was straddling the fence between the invasion being a bad idea and that he could conduct the war better and get out faster. Dean was the "antiwar" candidate, and he lost. Even Edwards was still a hawk. In 2006, NONE of the Democrats who won Republican-held seats campaigned on a timetable for withdrawal. In fact, they ALL specifically denied they were in favor of such and said they only wanted "to do it better" to end the war faster.

Of course, they were lying through their teeth like the scurvy knaves they are, and immediately voted for what they said they opposed, BUT they did NOT campaign on that. The only Democrats who did were those running for "safe" seats, except for Lamont in Connecticut - who lost.

So this year, a Presidential year, will be the first time the Democrats have run nationally on an antiwar platform. They are pretty much stuck with it, since all of their potential Presidential nominees are now against the war and in favor of surrender and defeat. The down-ticket will also rise or fall with Iraq. That will be THE issue this cycle.

I've followed politics since 1960, and studied the history of prior campaigns. I cannot recall a single election where the American people voted to lose a war. Will next year be the first?

Its easy to compare Westmor... (Below threshold)
SPQR:

Its easy to compare Westmoreland and Petraeus. All it takes is complete ignorance of both men.

Confronted with reality, Pa... (Below threshold)
What a Loser:

Confronted with reality, Paul Hussain is forced to cry "Vietnam, Vietnam, Vietnam" because he nothing else to say.

PH, didn't you get the memo... (Below threshold)
Razor:

PH, didn't you get the memo? The 60's are ancient history. The time from now to the 60's is the time from the 60's to prohibition. What you think about prohibition is not as bad as what I think about the 60's. You might as well be talking about the evils of Coolidge and his laissez-faire style. LOL, old man...

God god almighty that's all... (Below threshold)
JFO:

God god almighty that's all our dimwit president [b]ush did all last week and the week before. , compare this folly to Vietnam. Do you righties just get your information from one another's slavering comments? No doubt you do.

Five years after Westmorela... (Below threshold)

Five years after Westmoreland gave his optimistic 1967 report to Congress we were still in Vietnam. Five years after Petraeus gave his optimistic 2007 report to Congress, we'll still be in Iraq.

Mark my words and post it on your refrigerator door to remind yourself of it five years from now.

Those who fail to learn fro... (Below threshold)

Those who fail to learn from History,

Help Americans decide to vote Republican.

Of course we'll be in Iraq ... (Below threshold)
yo:

Of course we'll be in Iraq in 5 years. Hell, we're still in South Korea.

Did you not read/listen to Petreaus' report? He's already said we'd be there for a while.

Methinks your crystal ball looks a lot like a tv.

Oh, and five years after Westmoreland made his '67 comments, we were still in Vietnam, yes. A year later, we left.

I'm sorry, what was your point, again?

And, honestly ..., you say you got your draft card, but didn't state when. When did you get your draft card? Dec of '72?

Sure, it would be ... (Below threshold)
Sure, it would be a real surprise if California got into play for 2008 but if it does, the Democrats are done.

This statement is living proof that all Wizbang authors should be subject to mandatory drug-testing.

Besides your shocking ignorance of the California political scene you seem to have also sidestepped the fact that the Democrats and Ron Paul are raising heaps of money from people in the military.

I live under the flight path of MCAS Miramar and I work close to Camp Pendleton. I know a thing or two about what military people really think of this war. A buddy of mine is scheduled to go back to Iraq for his FIFTH tour soon. I can't even describe the look on his and his wife's face when he told me that. I can assure it wasn't one of wild enthusiasm. If I had to guess my buddy will be throwing the lever for the guys with the "DEM" next to their names in 2008.

John Kerry beat (the incumbent) Bush in California by 1.2 million votes. That's 54-45% and is easily considered a landslide by most people. I can assure we won't see a single Presidential candidate in California next year. It's not even remotely in play.

Yo, the American presense i... (Below threshold)

Yo, the American presense in Vietnam ended with the fall of Saigon in 1975 and Americans and Vietnamese fleeing the U.S. Embassy. My 18th birthday was in August 1973, two years before the fall of Saigon. My dad served in Korea in 1950. Vietnam was the war of my generation. And Iraq is the quagmire war of this generation. Iraq will still be a major issue with the next president. I'm certain of that.

JFO the idiot: "God god alm... (Below threshold)
Drago:

JFO the idiot: "God god almighty that's all our dimwit president [b]ush did all last week and the week before. , compare this folly to Vietnam."

Uh, not quite.

The comparison the President made was between the results of our abandoning South Vietnam and the inevitable results of a possible abandoning of Iraq to Al Qaeda and other extremist groups.

That was the comparison.

There was absolutely no comparison to operational tactics or overall military strategy.

None.

But since JFO is a complete ignoramus in military matters (much like Hoosen, but not as bad as Paul "almost a PhD" Hoosen), I'm not surprised he made the mistake that he did.

Barney: "DJ, you mean the t... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Barney: "DJ, you mean the terrorist warlord Bush met with two weeks ago, praised in his speech last night and was blown-up by al Qaeda yesterday?"

Hmmm. Note to Self: "sometimes casualites occur in war."

It's interesting to note the almost gleeful tone in Barney's post about the Sunni tribal leader who turned against Al Qaeda.

Not surprising though.

Drago, at some point the U.... (Below threshold)

Drago, at some point the U.S. will abandon Iraq no matter the political party of the president and the worse possible things will happen such as more Iranian involvement. When Britain withdrew in Basra recently, then rival Shiite militia groups, some armed by Iran went on to battle with each other. Iran owns the most powerful militias in Iraq and has the most to gain there.

I'm not happy with the 2003 Iraq War, but the eventual future withdrawal by U.S forces due to political reality will only result in more deaths and suffering in Iraq as well. There's nothing good about war.

Paul, we are also still in ... (Below threshold)

Paul, we are also still in Germany and Japan...and South Korea. By your logic we should evacuate those occupied nations. HEY thats not a bad idea!

libtards...Thats a... (Below threshold)
Dave W:

libtards...

Thats all i gots to say about that

Paul,You got me. ... (Below threshold)
yo:

Paul,

You got me. I meant "on our way out" ('72); but, what I meant to type doesn't count: point Paul.

Now, having said that, in January of '73, Nixon called off further offensive actions in Vietnam - effectively ending our military involvement.

Based on such, I find it interesting that you use your possession of having a draft card to lend credence to your original argument, but you weren't in any danger of actually being drafted.

Additionally, I find it interesting that you consider Vietnam the war of your generation and then call Iraq a quagmire.

Iraq, like Korea, will be a problem for the next few presidents, I'm afraid.

Side note: props to your dad for his service.

"There's nothing good about... (Below threshold)
yo:

"There's nothing good about war."

There's one thing that's actually worse: abandoning a war before it's completed based on political power maneuvers, only to return against a more powerful enemy, down the road.

If the current Iraq war is, as you say, a quagmire, the resulting Iranian conflict in 5 years will be much, much worse. And, you can mark my words: many more American soldiers will die if we get to that point (not to mention Israel and other parts of the region being turned into glowing piss-holes).

Hooson, you've so <a href="... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Hooson, you've so discredited yourself and proved yourself an asshole so many times, why do you keep babbling?

You clearly are an ignorant fool just repeating the latest Dem talking points.

Paul the complete historica... (Below threshold)
Drago:

Paul the complete historically illiterate mo: "There's nothing good about war."

Yeah, except for American Independence, ending slavery by force and keeping the union together, ending imperial Japanese ambitions, and defeating Nazism, war hasn't really accomplished much.

I mean, Paul has a point. After all, has War ever bought a brand new Pony for an orphan at Boys Town? Huh? Has it?? I didn't think so. And has War ever had it's picture on a bubblegum card?? How can War be good if it never had it's picture on a bubblegum card??

Gee Paul, thanks for your "insight".

Paul, you continue to impress me as the single, most ignorant poster on military matters I've ever read on the blogs. Your ignorance has been exposed so often, in so many forums, that it's extraordinary that you will still cut and paste on military matters.

Amazing.

And, for the record, I think DJ is out of his mind if he thinks any republican can get to within 10 points of any Dem in California during a General Election.

This statement is ... (Below threshold)
Paul:
This statement is living proof that all Wizbang authors should be subject to mandatory drug-testing.

Larkin, Larkin Larkin... Do you really want to open that can of worms?

Last time you did, it took me 7 minutes to prove you whre a bigger asshole than Hooson. Now if you'd like to take a stroll over to Blue and see what you children are up to, I'll be happy to...

You won't like the results. Trust me.

Uhh, Drago, not that I'm im... (Below threshold)

Uhh, Drago, not that I'm impressed with losing by 9 points in a state, but W lost California to Kerry in '04 by that margin. Barney called that a "landslide", which speaks a bit about his goal posts, but it certainly means that since it happened in just the last election, and since the Republican has gained in popular vote share in California for each of the last three Presidential elections, a man would not at all be "out of his mind" to observe that simple math.

Ahh, but I forget - you are in Denial, with all of the other four stages yet to come.

Paul Hooson, of course ther... (Below threshold)
WildWillie:

Paul Hooson, of course there will still be troops in the region for years to come. Look at Europe, Korea, etc. That is the way it goes. What an idiot. Now if you were to say the war will still be going on for years to come, I disagree with that. JFO, your comment was too stupid to debate.

So Paul and you lefty loons are saying that the good General is lying and betraying our country? How sweet. ww

DJ: "Ahh, but I forget - yo... (Below threshold)
Drago:

DJ: "Ahh, but I forget - you are in Denial, with all of the other four stages yet to come."

(Stamping Feet) "I'm not in denial!! I'm not!! Really!!" Heh.

Seriously, ok, I stand corrected. Bush got to within 9 points.

But DJ, all the trends on future electoral strength are going the other way for Repubs in CA.

As a military brat who grew up in California (Bay Area and San Diego), who also spent 4 years of my Navy career in California, who still has untold numbers of acquaintenances up and down the state, I still say we are not going to win in California.

Larkin,(and, I'm s... (Below threshold)
yo:

Larkin,

(and, I'm still on board for Wiz-Chicago gig, if we can round up some folk), you said something that piqued the interest:

"Democrats and Ron Paul are raising heaps of money from people in the military."

Ron Paul money, I'm sorry. While it spends nicely on Boardwalk, doesn't do much in the real world.

As for the "heaps of money" coming from the military, I saw that report (or, a report) that I wish I could link to, but the amount of money was $19,000.

Hardly a heap.

larkin quoth:"you se... (Below threshold)
cirby:

larkin quoth:
"you seem to have also sidestepped the fact that the Democrats and Ron Paul are raising heaps of money from people in the military."

You're going off of that story this week, right?

Where the "heaps of money" was a bit larger than the Republican cash, but the whole thing was based on a VERY small number of donors, and the overall income of ALL military political donations was a bit smaller than the amount Hsu corralled for the Dems this year alone.

The number one Democrat getting money from the military in that report was Obama, who got donations of $200 or more from less than one hundred thirty-five actual donors.

That's not a sample size, either - it's the total cash and total number of people giving donations large enough ($200 or more) to record in that particular FEC statistic.

In other words, among people who cared enough to give more than $200 to a Presidential candidate, the biggest recipient managed to scrape up less than 135 out of 2.2 million military members, and all of them together managed les than 1000.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement, there. It also doesn't cover the much-larger pool of military donors who gave less than that (Republican Party donations tend to be smaller per donation, but they get donations from more people).

The report also fails in the "too many qualifiers" category. Any time someone has to use more than two qualifiers for a news story, it's bogus. So the "this year" "over $200" "recorded as military" "before the actual campaign starts" qualifier set kills it as a serious statistic.

Found it.The 19k w... (Below threshold)
yo:

Found it.

The 19k was the contribution to Paul.

$330k is what the military seems to be giving to the Dems, this go round (so far).

Still, neither is a heap.

http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=300

(I'm off my game today)

Drago, three quick points, ... (Below threshold)

Drago, three quick points, 'cause I gotta go get my daughter from daycare:

1. The GOP candidate has been closing for 3 POTUS elections, despite expectations that the opposite would happen.

2. The military, when it votes, votes GOP for POTUS. And if they come home in '08, then a whole lot will be stationed in California, and will therefore vote there. An anomolous event, but significant for the moment.

3. The GOP does not have to take California for it to matter; if they start getting close, the Donk will have to spend resources there, and that costs them in true Battleground states.

Gotta love that!

I don't disagree with the i... (Below threshold)
Drago:

I don't disagree with the idea of attacking blue states to spread the Dems money thinner.

Larkin:you see... (Below threshold)
marc:

Larkin:

you seem to have also sidestepped the fact that the Democrats and Ron Paul are raising heaps of money from people in the military.

And your proof of this is what?

Easy to say but I suspect much harder to come up with a credible source.

CrazyWho smeared Ker... (Below threshold)

Crazy
Who smeared Kerry?

JFO:"God god a... (Below threshold)
marc:

JFO:

"God god almighty that's all our dimwit president [b]ush did all last week and the week before. , compare this folly to Vietnam."

Remind me again who it was that couldn't possibly run on a Senate record that included 5 whole bills authored in nearly 20 years of service son he had "Report for Duty?"

And it's not like the Dems, or more precisely their Masters, don't spend any time living in the past. They wallow in it. Not to mention make shit up to sooth their own overinflated egos.

Nice post. One quibble: the... (Below threshold)
Scott in CA:

Nice post. One quibble: the Presidio of San Francisco was turned over to the National Park Service more than 10 years ago. Sixth Army is long gone. There are still a lot of military facilities in northern California, but none in the Bay Area.

California can indeed be in play. Our demographics are rapidly changing. The coast is losing population as younger married couples flee inland for cheaper housing and less "urban" crime. These young couples are mostly Republican. They are filling up the Central Valley and the southern inland deserts by the tens of thousands each year. These are the areas that are electing GOP folks to Sacramento every year, as well as Congress.

Another point: the state GOP out here is getting ready to put an iniative on the ballot in June 2008 that would split our electoral vote by Congressional district. This would give a Republican presidential candidate at LEAST 15 electoral votes from this state; sort of like handing him an extra Ohio. The state Dems are foaming at the mouth, and today in my town paper, I see that the Dems are actually planning to "disrupt" signature-gathering on this initiative. They're scared of this one, all right.

If it makes the ballot, and it passes, it will destroy any chance of all 55 electoral votes going to the Democratic nominee. If the election is close, they'll lose.

California can indeed by flipped. Just like our houses.

marc: "Easy to say but I... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

marc: "Easy to say but I suspect much harder to come up with a credible source."

WizBlue motto:

"Credible sources? We don't need no stinking credibe sources. If we hear or read something that supports our worldview it MUST be true!!!"

"war hero like John Kerr... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

"war hero like John Kerry"

He was a "hero" only to himself and the enemy.

crazy repubs:I... (Below threshold)
marc:

crazy repubs:

I love how the right complains about attacking the millitary, while having smeared a war hero like John Kerry;

Just a small correction CR, that should read, "reluctant war hero" who had his deferment turned down and only went into Swift Boat service because at the time they only patrolled the coastline where the treat was minimal.

After volunteering the mission changed to patrolling up river/inland and far into the "danger zone."

The rest is history, three "injuries" that most folks would pay little attention to and Kerry bugging out after only 9 months served in theater out of 12 required.

"CrazyWho smeared Ke... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

"Crazy
Who smeared Kerry?"

Haven't you figured it out yet Hugh? Telling the whole truth about a leftist is "smearing" them in the fabricated reality of the left. So is qouting them in their entirely and in context.

I'm sorry, in #42 change "o... (Below threshold)
P. Bunyan:

I'm sorry, in #42 change "only" to "mostly", then it's true.

P BunyanAs you know ... (Below threshold)

P Bunyan
As you know probably know, I'm just waiting for the complaint about the Swifties. Ah, for the days of a total smack down delivered by authentic heroes:

http://horse.he.net/~swiftpow/index.php


Babble2000<blockquote... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Babble2000

DJ, even Rush on his show today admitted that no laws or policies were broken, so I think you should retract your statement.

You listen to Rush? Doubtful. But either way if he said that he was wrong.

Read Taranto today.

BarneyI have the Rus... (Below threshold)

Barney
I have the Rush Archive available: when did he say that? Today?

I found it Barney:... (Below threshold)

I found it Barney:

They can do whatever they want. They can accept advertising; they don't have to accept it. I have no problem with that. You know, we do it all the time. We reject advertising on this program. Everybody can do that. It's your business, you can do that. When you start messing around with the rate card like this, though, you're going to have some problems. (interruption) Well, that's a good point. The rate card may be $167,000, and maybe they're not getting it, but I don't think they're discounting a hundred grand, H.R. There clearly was some sympathy, no pun intended here, but they're obviously on the same page with MoveOn.org. Credit EIB Network

Context is everything, isn't it?

As I said last night Barney, the NYT has been screwing its shareholders for years:


http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/charts/chartdl.aspx?C6=2007&PeriodType=7&D3=0&CP=0&PT=7&CE=0&&ShowChtBt=Refresh+Chart&DateRangeForm=1&Symbol=NYT&C8=2007&C5=9&C7=9&ComparisonsForm=1&D5=0&D4=1&ViewType=0&C9=1&DisplayForm=1

If their customers can't believe them, why should we?


We can put the Kerry issue ... (Below threshold)
yo:

We can put the Kerry issue to rest with the simple acknowledgment that Kerry was running for President, Petreaus isn't.

When running for office, and when you salute and then state that you're reporting for duty, your military record becomes fair game.

Next.

KMA Barney. Why don'... (Below threshold)

KMA Barney.
Why don't you go to the site, search the archives and report back to us you fool. Did Rush say something about standby rates? Or are you just lying again? Or are you (AGAIN) confusing something you heard elsewhere with Rush? Your arguments here at Wizbang have a long history of resembling spaghetti; I won't do your footnoting.

"At that rate, an advertise... (Below threshold)
yo:

"At that rate, an advertiser can request that an ad run on a specific date, but cannot be guaranteed such placement"

And that's where the preferential treatment argument starts.

I'd like to know what plan Rudy got on his ad.

Still, I think the NYT gig, while despicable and wholly unprofessional (to me), is probably a red herring.

yo,The problem with ... (Below threshold)

yo,
The problem with the Moveon ad buy is that it reminds everyone again that the MSM is owned by the left. That may seem like old news to many, but for advocates like MRC and AIM it has been a mission to disclose for decades....with only recent widespread acknowledgements of success. Liken it to the Cuban exiles who have for decades wanted their homes returned. Any success, however small, is a victory.

The other issue with the ad buy is the uninterrupted demise of the NYT. This is real news not just because of the corporate failure of what was once an almost monopoly institution, but also in light of Sarbanes Oxley and McCain Feingold. Soft money and full disclosure are genuine legal issues that the NYT may have run afoul of.


Don't get me wrong, Hugh, t... (Below threshold)
yo:

Don't get me wrong, Hugh, this doesn't pass the sniff test; but, I'm not really sure I can accurately pinpoint the smell.

How is SOX in the mix? McCain/Feinbastard doesn't really hold, does it (esp. considering Rudy ran an ad which was def. a campaign ad)? Can a PAC run an ad that doesn't support a candidate?

I'm not up on those legalities.

Yo, the American presens... (Below threshold)
The Atom Bomb of Loving Kindness:

Yo, the American presense in Vietnam ended with the fall of Saigon in 1975 and Americans and Vietnamese fleeing the U.S. Embassy.
Once again a leftard shows why no socialist should go outside without a keeper. Actually, the Paris Peace Accords were signed in January of 1973. ALL US combat troops had 60 days to 'redeploy.' Additionally North Vietnam agreed to respect the sovreignty of South Vietnam. The US troop withdrawal happened. The other part, obviously, did not. That's because the imperialist warmongers of the mid to late 20th century were almost always Communist countries.
Of course knowing this would actually take some degree of intelligence -- so it is unrealistic to expect anyone on the left to be aware of any of these facts.
Unless we're counting US embassy personnel as a 'military presence.' In which case the US military is occupying some 99% of the nations of the world (and they also occupy us).
Idiot.

The Sox aspect is this; all... (Below threshold)

The Sox aspect is this; all major company practices must be documented in any publicly-owned corporation, which includes the NYT. If a corporation does something which is not established in the protocols, it is a deviation from the norm, and may be grounds for the SEC to declare that the company has violated its covenant. And a full audit by a government agency looking for evidence of criminal wrongdoing is no picnic.

It is unlikely that one incident would provoke an SEC investigation, but such a highly publicized and irregular behavior will invite SEC scrutiny if any other allegations show up in the rest of the year.

The Atom Bomb: "Actually, t... (Below threshold)
Drago:

The Atom Bomb: "Actually, the Paris Peace Accords were signed in January of 1973. ALL US combat troops had 60 days to 'redeploy.' Additionally North Vietnam agreed to respect the sovreignty of South Vietnam. The US troop withdrawal happened. The other part, obviously, did not. That's because the imperialist warmongers of the mid to late 20th century were almost always Communist countries."

Too true.

Further, when South Vietnam did fall, it wasn't the "peasants" or the "proletariat" that rose up and defeated the South, it was NVA Regulars in their Armored columns consisting of Soviet made tanks and personnel carriers that rolled right down Highway 1 into Saigon.

Idiots like Hoosen (who repeatedly throws out how he had family members in WWII and Korea, as if that gives him "insight" into military matters) are incapable of understanding basic military history.

AB, yeah, man .. but I didn... (Below threshold)
yo:

AB, yeah, man .. but I didn't feel like typing all of that. ;)

DJ - got it. But, if they didn't violate Sox, then ... we pretty much got nuthin' on the NYT that we didn't already know.

The NYT is the little fish in this one, and let 'em go. The Dems are more than happy to support MoveOn and what it represents, and that's all that really matters. Let 'em.

MoveOn has called a lot of attention on themselves, and that's the wrong thing to have. When the politically unsavvy types get a load of the crap they're up to ... tsk tsk tsk.

I figure the Dems have about 48 hours to swim as far away from this as they can, or sink with MoveOn.

It won't be the end of the world for them, it'll just feel like it when they swear in the GOP Pres.

I'd lay money on it.

Drago, my point about the e... (Below threshold)
yo:

Drago, my point about the ending of offensive stuff in Vietnam was just to show that Paul needn't mention his draft card, again.

Baghdad barney:<em... (Below threshold)
marc:

Baghdad barney:

marc, so all service members who fulfill their service duty state side after receiving their third purple heart should be accused of "bugging out"? Way to support the troops marc.

No asshat completing only 9 months of a 12 month tour (the REQUIREMENT in country) and leaving for "injuries" that were far, FAR worse than many who stayed and completed 12 months is rightfully called bugging out on your shipmates.

Put into todays terms dickhead, this is a dedicated and TRUE war hero. He losses a foot and returns to full duty in Iraq.

But the psuedo-"war hero" kerry scampered like a cat with turpentine on his ass as soon as possible.

What's your favorite phrase barney? Oh yea... stick it in your ass!

Seriously .., do you need a... (Below threshold)
yo:

Seriously .., do you need any more proof than what Kerry gave us already?

3 Purple Hearts
0 days in the hospital

How is that not f'd up?

Back on topic:Trus... (Below threshold)
Eric in CA:

Back on topic:

Trust me when I tell you the Republicans have no chance in California. The current party leadership sold its collective soul during redistricting. They're not even trying to get any kind of message out anymore.

There's only one major newspaper in the state that doesn't bias the news leftward, and our budget goes from emergency to emergency because the average Joe hasn't figured out things need to be paid for.

No presidential candidate has made any effort in the state as far back as I can remember. They make a quick swing through Silicon Valley (Republicans) or Hollywood (Democrats) to raise money then jet out to some other state to spend it. Then we don't see them again. Ever. We have a late primary and the election is over before our polls close.

The only candidate that could possibly take CA is an Arnold-like RINO.

#47--yeah, they cut them ou... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

#47--yeah, they cut them out of bandaid boxes.

Barney Baggy, did anyone ev... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Barney Baggy, did anyone ever tell you that you are one un-American SOB? Just like to know so I will know how to address you from now on.

Baghdad barney:<em... (Below threshold)
marc:

Baghdad barney:

He had two requests for command (after his promotion serving on the Gridley). His first choice was coastal patrol and his second was river patrol.

During his swift boat tour he was awarded the purple heart three times, the bronze star and the silver star.

Every time you disparage Kerry's awards you disparage everyone that has served.

Shame on you.

It's hard to believe you're getting dumber, but this comment is proof.

Funny you should mention the Bronze Star. Better take a VERY close look at pic of General Petraeus. Specifically his "Fruit Salad," i.e. awards pinned on his uniform.

He's been awarded a Bronze Star..... So DICKHEAD every time you bow down before MorOn.org and defend the Petraeus ad you disparage everyone who has also been awarded it. Including the "reluctant war hero" Kerry.

And that's not the end of your stupidity in this comment. You haven't clue #1 about Kerry's history.

Read it and frickin weep asshat, the following is from Kerry's official biography:

Kerry served two tours. For a relatively uneventful six months, from December 1967 to June 1968, he served in the electrical department aboard the USS Gridley, a guided-missile frigate that supported aircraft carriers in the Gulf of Tonkin and was far removed from combat.

"I didn't have any real feel for what the heck was going on [in the war]," Kerry has recalled. His ship returned to its Long Beach, Calif., port on June 6, 1968, the day that Robert F. Kennedy died from a gunshot wound he received on the previous night at a Los Angeles hotel. The antiwar protests were growing. But within five months Kerry was heading back to Vietnam, seeking to fulfill his officer commitment despite his growing misgivings about the war.

Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.

"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially vulnerable targets.

BB, your so far below stupid you border on mental retardation.

NOTE, comments seem to be a... (Below threshold)
marc:

NOTE, comments seem to be acting funny, if this is posted twice pleas delete the dup.

Baghdad barney:

He had two requests for command (after his promotion serving on the Gridley). His first choice was coastal patrol and his second was river patrol.

During his swift boat tour he was awarded the purple heart three times, the bronze star and the silver star.

Every time you disparage Kerry's awards you disparage everyone that has served.

Shame on you.

It's hard to believe you're getting dumber, but this comment is proof.

Funny you should mention the Bronze Star. Better take a VERY close look at pic of General Petraeus. Specifically his "Fruit Salad," i.e. awards pinned on his uniform.

He's been awarded a Bronze Star..... So DICKHEAD every time you bow down before MorOn.org and defend the Petraeus ad you disparage everyone who has also been awarded it. Including the "reluctant war hero" Kerry.

And that's not the end of your stupidity in this comment. You haven't clue #1 about Kerry's history.

Read it and frickin weep asshat, the following is from Kerry's official biography:

Kerry served two tours. For a relatively uneventful six months, from December 1967 to June 1968, he served in the electrical department aboard the USS Gridley, a guided-missile frigate that supported aircraft carriers in the Gulf of Tonkin and was far removed from combat.

"I didn't have any real feel for what the heck was going on [in the war]," Kerry has recalled. His ship returned to its Long Beach, Calif., port on June 6, 1968, the day that Robert F. Kennedy died from a gunshot wound he received on the previous night at a Los Angeles hotel. The antiwar protests were growing. But within five months Kerry was heading back to Vietnam, seeking to fulfill his officer commitment despite his growing misgivings about the war.

Kerry initially hoped to continue his service at a relatively safe distance from most fighting, securing an assignment as "swift boat" skipper. While the 50-foot swift boats cruised the Vietnamese coast a little closer to the action than the Gridley had come, they were still considered relatively safe.

"I didn't really want to get involved in the war," Kerry said in a little-noticed contribution to a book of Vietnam reminiscences published in 1986. "When I signed up for the swift boats, they had very little to do with the war. They were engaged in coastal patrolling and that's what I thought I was going to be doing."

But two weeks after he arrived in Vietnam, the swift boat mission changed -- and Kerry went from having one of the safest assignments in the escalating conflict to one of the most dangerous. Under the newly launched Operation SEALORD, swift boats were charged with patrolling the narrow waterways of the Mekong Delta to draw fire and smoke out the enemy. Cruising inlets and coves and canals, swift boats were especially vulnerable targets.

BB, your so far below stupid you border on mental retardation.

Also Marc, time in combat? ... (Below threshold)
Ran:

Also Marc, time in combat? after "Orientation"? less then 3 MONTHS! and this is BB's hero? I was in Nam, for 2 years, lots of "Salad" which any vet will tell you means NOTHING compared to your bothers. I'd be HONORED if BB slammed me, PLEASE!

To me, Kerry's time actuall... (Below threshold)
MikeNC:

To me, Kerry's time actually "in country" has always seemed self serving and insignificant. What makes Kerry a low life traitor are his actions upon his return, particularly in Paris collaborating with the NVA & VC.

Um, Since Bob Dole's hand i... (Below threshold)
Dirk:

Um, Since Bob Dole's hand is crippled, I doubt he got "just a scratch". Maybe he was just being modest, like many men of that generation were when it came to war activity? He wasn't a blowhard like a certain Senator from Massachusetts about what he did.




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