Final word on the smearing of General Petraeus

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Friday, September 21. 2007

Final word on the smearing of General Petraeus

Captain Ed:

It�s a particularly sad commentary on the Democratic Party that they cannot bring themselves to support the very commander they sent to lead American troops in battle by a unanimous vote. It�s not a case of a few fringe politicians like Bernie Sanders or Barbara Boxer, either. The Majority Leader, Harry Reid, and his chief deputy, Dick Durbin, refused to condemn the smear on Petraeus� honor. Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd, both of whom want to become Commander in Chief over the military, chose to endorse MoveOn�s smear campaign against a man who has dedicated his life to defending this nation and serving presidents in a nonpartisan manner.

A Commander in Chief cannot�dishonor the military: they are the only thing between us and the barbarians. What more can be said? As Bob Grant often says on the radio, "It's sick out there, and getting sicker."

Posted by The News Junkie in Politics at 15:04 | Comments (21) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

"It's sick out there, and getting sicker."

It damn sure is. The Dem leadership is a goddamn disgrace. And I say that not as some sort of auto-GOP supporter, which I am not.

#1 buddy larsen on 2007-09-21 16:02 (Reply)

because they are good Dems and stalwart Libs to support.

#1.1 repuglican on 2007-09-21 16:20 (Reply)

Yeah, but Hillary is winning the support of the military. Her husband said so, so it must be true.

#2 terrence on 2007-09-21 16:19 (Reply)

Captain Ed nails it.

Still, this is the story that keeps on giving - to the GOP!

#3 Donald Douglas (Link) on 2007-09-21 16:36 (Reply)

These guys are trapped in an echo chamber. The base of the Democratic Party runs the party. The squeaky wheel get's the grease. They'll be shocked come November next if they keep this stuff up.

#4 Tom C., Stamford,Ct on 2007-09-21 16:57 (Reply)

I think it's a big mistake on the Dems' part. People rightly respect the military far more than politicians.

#5 BD on 2007-09-21 17:23 (Reply)

I think Karl Rove is behind this.

#6 Banjo on 2007-09-21 17:32 (Reply)

I don't get Hillary's vote. Does she really think this will slide by unnoticed come the general election campaign? A much better move would have been for her to be conveniently absent from the voting...bad hair day or something.

But to vote against it seems politically not wise...unless the money behind Moveon is just too important to piss off.

#7 Phil G on 2007-09-21 17:34 (Reply)

it's said to've swung up a half-dozen or more 2006 close house races --

#7.1 buddy larsen on 2007-09-21 17:42 (Reply)

Does anyone else think George Soros and his colossal fortune is sinister?

#8 Banjo on 2007-09-21 17:56 (Reply)

Sinister as hell.

#8.1 BD on 2007-09-21 18:12 (Reply)

For Mr Soros, 'sinister' is light, almost a compliment.

#8.1.1 buddy larsen on 2007-09-21 19:53 (Reply)

Do you remember Tailhook??? A few Naval Aviators pinched some girls at the Las Vegas Hilton. Most of the girls liked it and that is exactly why they went to the party...One loudmouth hound bayed at the affront and you would have thought Satan himself convened the Tailhook Convention. The Commanding Officer of the Blue Angels was passed over for Captain for having merely attended the professional functions at the Tailhook convention. As a Marine Aviator who never even attended a Tailhook Convention, I had to sign several legal documents attesting to the fact that I had not attended. The Navy was hounded by the media and the Congressional elites like Pat Schroeder from California for years. The Secretary of the Navy even accused his Navy of having a "cultural problem". Now, remember who was Commander in Chief. You know, the guy who turned the Oval office into a romper room for interns...The Commander in Chief folded his arms while his Navy was being excoriated, its reputation sullied around the world, and while some of its finest officers had their careers ruined. For what? What happened at Tailhook happens at Frat parties across the land every Friday night. The question I have to ask; what was Hillary's role? Could she have been the lesbian co-president who was pulling the strings behind the scenes? We will never know in the case of Tailhook. But, her actions vis a vis the Moveon ad show the respect she has for the brave men who fight this country's battles, none...Yeah, I know. Too long and incoherent. Whatever! I need to get a life, or at least a job.

#9 Scott Wiggins on 2007-09-21 18:09 (Reply)

well, I loved every word of it. Yes, I remember Pat Schroeder, and the whole sorry affair. When a Clinton type is president, the slimeballs rise rampant everywhere across the land and sea.

#9.1 buddy larsen on 2007-09-21 18:20 (Reply)

O'Reilly on tv just recommended reading Investor's Business Daily's editorial on Soros.
http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=275181103776079

IBD has been laying down some heavy fire lately, take a look:

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/

#10 buddy larsen on 2007-09-21 20:19 (Reply)

You know Scott, you bring forth some excellent points. But perhaps not the ones you think. For myself, I don't think Naval Aviators should have their behavior reduced and/or compared/forgiven based on the actions of 18 year olds at frat parties.

Yes, men will be men. And in my 'manly' Marine days of long ago I was more than guilty of "overpinching". But the 'old ways' are not always the best ways. The pendulum swings to extremes, for sure. But it is up to the professionals to find that middle ground (though that sounds so PC) and act accordingly. The excuse of the burdens of responsibility and the concurrent needed 'release' of same are no longer enough. We all need to be more mature in our actions, perhaps.

#11 Luther McLeod on 2007-09-21 23:22 (Reply)

Luther,

I meant to point out the absurdity of a multi-year witchhunt that costs the careers of some fine officers who weren't guilty of anything except having attended Tailhook. In my view, the witch-hunt was orchestrated by some very highly placed man-haters...Call me paranoid. As a Marine Officer, I was personally and professionally insulted by having to sign legal documents attesting the fact that I had not been to Tailhook. Apparently, my word was not good enough. It was way way overdone...I wonder still wonder why...Granted, Naval Aviators should and are held to a hight standard than Frat boys...Semper fi

#11.1 Scott Wiggins on 2007-09-22 14:03 (Reply)

If Hillary is elected, one can look for more Tailhook-style witch hunts with the added bonus of gay sensitivities to take into consideration.

#12 Banjo on 2007-09-22 17:51 (Reply)

Scott

I remember 'tailhook' well and I do not disagree with your assessment, necessarily or particularly. That really isn't what I was talking about. I just though I saw a hint of 'boys will be boys' in your remark, and wanted to mention that those days may be over, and frankly, I see that as a good thing in most respects. It is a new military we have and a damn good one obviously, and some of those 'old' ways will not make a good 'fit' for this new military.

By the way, did you see that Israel has now opened all their branch's to women, including infantry, arty and others. We'll see how that works out I guess.

Semper Fi

Just saw your comment while previewing Banjo. You are likely correct. We may run out of volunteers should that occur. Which would suit the Hil just fine, of course.

#13 Luther McLeod on 2007-09-22 18:11 (Reply)

hang in there, Marines--you guys paid for the microphone (as Ronald Reagan famously said), so don't let the Hil bunch ride you down again.

Tailhook was a flexing of their Watergate muscle--using the model this time to put the uniforms in their place, now that the Libs were back in town.

Navy got nifonged--except that word wasn't around yet then. Dirty politics, destructive, crooked, dirty left-wing politics.

#14 buddy larsen on 2007-09-22 22:25 (Reply)

''The Commander in Chief folded his arms while his Navy was being excoriated, its reputation sullied around the world, and while some of its finest officers had their careers ruined. For what?''

Good question. I think we all know the answer: to demoralize the nation, and particularly the nation's armed forces.

#15 buddy larsen on 2007-09-22 22:31 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Friday, September 21. 2007

Final word on the smearing of General Petraeus