Richard Florino Jr. in his letter to the editor today attacked Senator Clinton because of the grilling she gave General Patraeus when he was recently answering questions before the Senate. I guess he doesn’t like our military to have to answer to Congress, the body that represents the American people. What Mr. Florino forgot to mention, is that other senators besides Clinton also had tough questions for the general, but by singling out Hillary as “shameful,” Mr. Florino is trying to highlight a contrast to his favorite candidate Guliani. I also noticed another letter to the editor that supported Hillary for president; however, this writer didn’t see the need to attack Guliani or any other candidate to make her case for Hillary. In addition, Mr. Florino forgot to mention that Senator Clinton did express her confidence in General Patraeus after his showing before the Senate in an interview she had with Public Radio.

It seems that the conservatives, including President Bush, have really got their knickers in a knot over the MoveOn’s propaganda ad “General Be-Tray-us.” I wonder if they are angry because the ad attacks the general or just angry because they are having a difficult time swallowing their own medicine?

It seems they think that only they can question the patriotism of people, such as Congressmen who are against the war by saying that these skeptics are “emboldening the enemy.” It’s only ok for the president and vice-president to have contempt for the people’s representatives in Congress, but not for Congress to hold generals accountable for the job they are supposed to do.

I enjoyed President Bush’s response to the MoveOn ad. He said that the DemocRAT (emphasis on the RAT) Party and MoveOn people have not just insulted General Patraeus, but have insulted the entire US Military. Typical of Bush to turn propaganda into propaganda.

I too was thinking that the MoveOn moniker of “General Betray-us” was amateurish, and tried to think of a better nickname for the good general.

Here are some that came to mind used for other generals:

“Old Blood and Guts” General Patton
“Vinegar Joe” Joe Stillwell
“Doug-out-Doug” Douglas McArthur
“Old Fuss and Feathers” Winfield Scott
“Uncle Billie” William Tecumsah Sherman
and General Robert E. Lee’s men once took to calling him “Granny Lee” because they felt he did not aggressively engage the enemy the first time he took command of the Confederate troops.

And the generals have also had their say. General McClellen of the Union Army once called President Lincoln the “original baboon.”

I think for now I will call General Patraeus “General Bootlicker” for lack of a better description, because it seems that the only way a general can remain a general under this administration is by licking the presidential boots.

Nice to see that you are in lockstep with the MoveOn.org crowd. A general delivers a report that you don't like and you resort to namecalling and accusing him of caving into pressure from the administration to give a positive report to Congress.

None of the Democrat candidates will stand up to MoveOne.org because of the money that they (and their backers like George Soros) have to pump into campaigns. Obama and Biden missed the vote yesterday by the Senate condemning MoveOn.org's advertisement belittling General Petraeus

At least we know where you stand...

One of President Lincoln's cabinet members, I believe it was Stanton, saw Lincoln shining his own boots when Lincoln first became president. He told Lincoln that we don't shine our own boots here in Washington, to which Lincoln replied, "whose boots do you shine?"

And still today we have plenty of boot shiners in Washington, we don't need the generals getting in on the act.



As if the Republicans have ever stood up to the Right Wing Born again Christian Coalition types? McCain has openly courted them for his presidential campaign.

As if George Bush the senior didn't kiss Limaugh's fat behind after the 1988 election by inviting this radio show propagandist to dine with him at the White House?

Seamus, it seems to me you only don't like these things when they occur on the DemocRAT side, and have a penchant for forgetting what your beloved Republicans do.

General Petraeus wasn't shining anyone's boots. He was reporting on what is happening in Iraq. I'd rather get the information on what is happening on the ground in Iraq from him than a presidential candidate, CNN, MoveOn.org, DailyKos, or any of these other groups....

You just don't like what the General said. Quoting a movie "you can't handle the truth"....

When is the president or the general going to take the corrupt Al Maliki government to task? This idiot Al Maliki is quick to complain about Blackwater when civilians get cought in the crossfire, but ignores Shiite death squads embedded in his government's police?

This is the reason why Democrats say the war is lost, not because our troops have failed, but because of the crook Al Maliki, Bush's good friend, and the rest of those crooks in his government who refuse to capitalize on the security gains made by the US, and go on freaking vacation at a time when their country is in crisis and needs them the most!!

Bush, in his speech about Iraq last week said that the Iraqi police need more time.

This is the kind of Bull that the Bush admin expects military guys like Patraeus to salute. The fact is the Police in Iraq are murdering Iraqi civilians.

This crooked government will not succeed, and we cannot afford sacrificing our troops for their ineptitude and crookedness.

It's dispicable. You are right, I can't handle that dispicable truth, it makes my blood boil that these jerks in the Iraqi government could care one iota about the deaths and sacrifices of our troops, because if they really cared, they would get their act together NOW, and stop whining that they need more time for the American troops to save their sorry behinds.

It's been at least three years since that doofus Bush promised the American people that this government would stand on it's own, it's long overdue.

Al Maliki is a slacker and a crook.

In order for me not to be able to "handle the truth...." I would have to be told the truth. And who within the Bush administration is capable of telling the American people the truth? Dick Cheney

An average of 690 corpses from the Iraqi populace show up at Baghdad's morgue every month, over 8,000 per year? What has the Al Maliki government done to stop this? They are incapable of governing and securing the lives of their own constituents. The basic role of government in a true free society.

When is the Bush administration going to tell the American people the truth about this war?

That's why Congress, despite what you and I and everyone else thinks of them, did right by putting Patraeus in the hot seat.

By calling him "General BetrayUs"??? Or "Bootlicker"?
This is the very same Congress that approved him UNANIMOUSLY to do the job THEY gave him.
Then they call him out for actually doing it! He reports that he has followed Congress' orders and reports that he and the troops are doing exactly what was ordered, and with much success! For that, the Dems nearly choked on their bile. Hmmmmm
Winning a war or even showing gains for the US is NOT in the best interest of the likes of Clinton, Obama, Pelosi, Kennedy, Kerry, Murtha, Reid, and their kind. (Damn that General for trying to give us good news of any type! Don't he know we are trying to get the Presidency to the Dems here?)

I am seriously beginning to wonder about betrayal in the halls of the brand-new Dem controlled Congress.
After listening to the last couple of Bin Laden tapes, I am beginning to think HE is gonna run as a Dem presidential candidate in 2008. At the very least he will write the platforms to be unveiled at the Dem National Convention!

Maybe, he will be the new anchor of CBS News Evening Edition. Yes, CBS... That bastion of "news" as a left-wing political fantasy rewrite ala Dan Rather, et al.
I mean, they DID hire that "perky" Couric bimbette, didn't they? hahahahaha Now that's a ruff 'n tuff hardcase reporter of the old-school, yessir, you betcha! hahahaha

Anyhow, the Assama Bin Laden tapes are nearly carbon-copies of the current Democrat political raving and ranting . Good Ole Bin Laden got all the Democrat talking points right-on!
Or is it the other way around? Or both ways?
In any way, they all sure do appear to be in agreement with each other.
Exactly WHO is betraying us here??

Sure does validate the opinion that many on the Left are on Bin Laden's side but do not want to openly admit it (yet). Except for calling our military men "betrayers", that is.
Damn if Assama isn't using the exact same criticisms used by Democrats against George Bush.
Hmmmmm.
Sure looks as if Assama would be right at home if he attended any Democratic party love-fest in this country.
For all we know HE may be the Dem Party dark-horse candidate for 2008.
That sure would make lovers of moveon.org ecstatic!

They would have to call their doctors: "Hey Doc....It's been more than four hours and I cannot get rid of my erection!" "No, Doc, I did not take any of those male enhancers. Me and my moveon.org buds just got to thinking about Assama Bin Laden running for US Prez as a left-wing liberal Democrat, and got all hot and bothered...and excited!!!"
Makes ya wonder why Shrillary Clinton only wears pantssuits, never a dress. (Oh Yuck ooomppphhh barf)

Gosh, I wonder how it makes Democrats feel to see their hate-filled words repeated back by Assama Bin Laden as part of HIS ideology?

Oh. By-The-By... Don't forget to embrace radical Islam. It's the left-wing thing to do nowadays. Ask anybody at dear Columbia U.
Don't try to find and ask the ROTC tho, they are barred from that campus!
God help us.

How different the war was fought in World War II compared with today in Iraq.

The fact is, the United States has not decisively won a major hot war since World War II.

What made the Greatest Generation so successful was a "take no prisoner" approach. The Allies early on took the position of "unconditional surrender."

No negotiation, no political settlement, no re-training of a German army or of a Japanese army, no co-existence with the enemy.

No surge.

World War II was won because every major German city was reduced to rubble.

When the Japanese adopted national suicide as a weapon against invasion, the United States dropped not one but two atomic bombs, ending the war decisively.

How can brave Americans be told to go into the same neighborhood again and again, travel the same roads again and again, fight the same battles again and again, to get blown up by crude homemade devices carried by fanatical, suicidal men, women and children.

There is only one way to win this war:

If Fallujah remains a problem, reduce it to rubble.

If Sadr City hides terrorists, bomb it to dust.

If the Shiites hate the Sunnis hate the Kurds, split the country into separately governed parts with secure borders, same as the former Yugoslavia.

Our political leadership has deteriorated to near-incompetence. Having lied to get us into this war, it now has no clue how to get us out. One major difference between the Greatest Generations and the current is the inability of the current generation to elect competent leaders.

Bush Junior? O-Bambi? Billary? Good lord, give me a break! How do we ever hope to win this relatively minor war, when compared with World War II or the nuclear MADD-strategy Cold War, with these caliber leaders?

According to C. King, police in NH are killing citizens too. Where's the outrage over this?

Until someone visits Iraq and sees with their own eyes, they have to accept what the General reports. Ask questions, yes. Tough ones, I hope so. But don't belittle the general, and base your belief of his statements on anything other than first hand experience. He's the one put into his position over there, and has sworn to tell the truth.

The only thing we have to "contrast" his report with is the reports by the new media. How come no one is raking the media over the coals for their reporting from Iraq?

Perhaps if they focused on the complete story instead of the negative focus they believe will help circulation and ad sales, the American public might actually be able to figure out what is really happening there.

Tom P. The Democrats in Congress did not call Patraeus "Betray-us." That was MoveOn, who does not represent the views of the Democratic Party. I called Patraeus a "bootshiner" because of the revolving door in the Bush aministration regarding generals.



They canthabdle the truth, you can't recognize the truth.

The first Gulf War that defeated the Iraqis and removed them from Kuwait was a "decisive" victory. Furthermore The defeat of Saddam, his two dead sons, and Saddam hanging by the end of a rope looked pretty decisive to me regarding Bush's Iraq War.

Furthermore, ToM P.'s website debunks myths about the Vietnam War. The American Miltary did not lose the Vietnam War. The failure came from the Nixon administration's failure to successfully train, equip, the South Vietnam army. The failure of Saigon wa a failure of the corrupt inept South Vietnamese government. They could not defend themselves.

SOUND FAMILIAR?

The American Military destroys Saddam's regime, but the Bush administration is failing in their "nation building" regarding AL MAliki's corrupt inept government, as Nixon did in Vietnam.

Mr. You cant handle the truth,
destroying cities and murdering civilians will make the USA a pariah among nations in the world.

It's a bad idea,
You are pretty much out of your gourd with this idea.

Quote Independent:


Are dead citizens showing up at the NH morgue at a rate of 700 per month? Due to a civil war?

And please, don't insult Law enforcement in NH or in the USA by comparing what the corrupt AL Maliki tries to pass off as "police" It's downright insulting and out of touch with reality. (or maybe this is not a serious statement?)

Tom,
I luff her!!!!! Stop it!! I luff her!!! Don't talk that way about my Katie!!!

You can't do dthe third if the do the first two.

If you wipe out the Shiites and the Sunnis, then you won't need to split the country in three, the Kurds will have it all by themselves.

In all seriousness, the first two make no sense, but splitting the country may be a way to bring peace. Have a "federated" country of Iraq, with three semi-autonimous regions.

The successful Yougoslavian model makes sense, now if we only had a president who could be as succesfull as Clinton. Hmm... I wonder who could do this?

Oh, OK. She is kind of interesting in a purely prurient sort of way.
I find myself counting all her nose crinklings, head tosses causing hair flips, leg crossings showing off her 6 inch stiletto heels among other things (Sharon Stone copycat? Hmmmmmm), coy sideway glances, and best of all.... the lost-deer-in-the-headlights expressions when the teleprompter gets stuck.

All she now needs is a small smoke-filled stage equipped with a brass pole, and two old geezers in suspenders, straw hats and cigars, off to one side playing a single snare drum and an out of tune upright piano.
Piano player either asleep or drunk. Drummer stooped over, very bored, and needs to wipe the drool off his chin.
I can hear it now: Ta-Dah-Boom, Ta-Dah Boom, Ta-Dah Boom-boom Boom ---

Katie (perkily), struts on stage, gives us a nose crinkle and a head toss, then jumps high up on the pole, does three 360's around it on the way down...
(Baritone announcer): Welcome to the CBS Evening News!!!

You luff her, I luff to laff at her.

Quote Tom P.



Aha!
See, you luff her too. Stay away she's mine!!

It was intended as a jab at a poster. Sorry if it wasn't clear.

But I stand by the remainder of the post. Negativity = ratings and ad sales. Until that changes, news will be skewed that way.