This morning, on all of the news shows, they are asking all of the Democrats on the news shows to denounce for their Petraeus/Betrayus ad.

I am incensed that they have not asked the Democrats to denounce the folks who used to call me Betsy-Wetsy or my brother Bart the Fart (although, in all fairness, I might have been the biggest ‘Bart the Fart’-er).

If we can’t count on the Democrats to denounce all schoolyard taunts, how can we count on them to lead America?

23 thoughts on “Petraeus/Betrayus

  1. Pingback: Music City Bloggers » Blog Archive » Aunt B. Asks A Political Question

  2. I have wicked insomnia, so a couple of nights ago I was watching ABC at about 3 in the morning. They were replaying The View, and Elizabeth Hasselback was shrieking about how Petraeus devoted his whole life to his country, therefore he is good and are all Hitler. My response? BFD, he devoted his “life” to his country, that doesn’t make you good.
    Also, when will they take that asstard off The View? I miss Rosie.

  3. I don’t know how Elizabeth Hasselback works. In a just world, the Right would be embarrassed to have her spouting their positions and demand Walters put someone on who isn’t just an emotional mess all the time.

    But I think portraying women as emotional messes serves too many agendas.

  4. Seriously. One of the many reasons I hate political campaigns and the coverage thereof, is the time wasted on these bullshit non-issues.

  5. In a just world, the Right would be embarrassed to have her spouting their positions and demand Walters put someone on who isn’t just an emotional mess all the time.

    I’m embarrassed by the totality of “The View” precisely because it makes all “women discussing issues” things look like a joke.

    They cry! They fight! They joke about shoes and purses! There’s little room for non-emotive types (a theme I’m sensing lately) in their paradigm.

  6. A shadow group that has bought and paid for the Democratic Party calls a democrat General a traitor at the start of his congressional testimony and it’s just a taunt? Sticks and stones will break my bones but calling me a war criminal, traitor is wholesome fun.

    I agree that there is nothing for Congressional Democrats to denounce. MoveOn’s message is their message. They are inseparable. They are too cowardly to come out and say it themselves so their friends the New York Times give a discount to George Soros’ group to say it for them.

  7. Bullshit, TN Native. That lie has been refuted over and again. They paid the same rate as anyone else.

    They didn’t call him a traitor. Thats a huge leap from a single act of betraying the citizens by giving an incomplete assessment that provides political cover.

    Like I said, it was an incredibly stupid title for a very important message, and I have sent them an email saying so. But that doesn’t change the fact that they have been trying to shout above the din of war drums for years, and that took courage.

  8. I’m embarrassed by the totality of “The View” precisely because it makes all “women discussing issues” things look like a joke.
    They cry! They fight! They joke about shoes and purses! There’s little room for non-emotive types (a theme I’m sensing lately) in their paradigm.

    Word. I wish there was a woman’s show that was interesting without being mortifying. I watch one show, on PBS sometimes, I think it’s sponsored by NOW, but it’s pretty boring. So boring that I can’t even remember the title.
    I only watched when Rosie was on. I don’t agree with her conspiracy theories, but it was about time that someone called Elizabeth on her bullshit.

  9. Sticks and stones will break my bones but calling me a war criminal, traitor is wholesome fun.

    sure it is! just ask ann coulter.

  10. “No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,” noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. “The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.” ~ The Politico

    Talk about a Profile in Courage.

    The Democratic Party:
    “We’re afraid to say what we believe.”

  11. I’d love to call him a liar on national TV. I would have loved to call Colin Powell a liar on national TV when he was lying to sell the Iraq war. However, no one with the decency and good sense to publicly call those brown-nosing functionaries liars would ever find their way onto national TV.

  12. That lie has been refuted over and again. They paid the same rate as anyone else.

    Where? That they were offered a standby “jump” rate that just happened to coincide with his first day of testimony? Timing was everything with that ad. The discount was the equivalent of getting a 61% cut rate on First Class Business airfare on Thanksgiving weekend at the last minute. That “debunking” is heavy on the bunk and not so much on the “de”.

    When Ann Coulter underwrites $18 million dollars to Congressional Republicans in one year and she claims that she has “bought them” then they should be asked to denounce her when she says something inflammatory. Otherwise, that analogy is fatuous.

  13. TN Native, welcome. But I must ask, don’t you think it’s a little weird that your anger seems to hinge on the fact that the Left is just not solemn enough for you?

    If the General were merely acting as a leader of our armed forces, I would have no problem with your criticism. But the truth, and we both know it, is that he’s a political player in this context.

    Political players don’t get special treatment just because they’re in the military. We don’t have to make nice and pretend that we don’t recognize them as political players just because they’re in the military.

    Your side would never accept us bleating on about how we need to take the unquestioning word of college professors and treat them with all the respect due such great intellectuals.

    Goose, gander, etc.

  14. Pingback: Volunteer Voters » Democrats Betray Themselves?

  15. as a rough rule of thumb, military officers of flag rank (generals, admirals and above) are necessarily political players whether they like it or not. they’ve got too much power, their job involves flinging around too much taxpayer money, for it to be otherwise.

    and certainly anybody who walks up to the podium to give testimony to the united states congress ought to know they’re playing politics at that moment, up until they step back down again if not longer. as such, they’re fair game for political criticism.

  16. I would like to know, now that the General has given his testimony and we all have read the accounts, what he said that made it legitimate to call him a Judas?

    Maybe a disagreement with some point of his analysis or some criticism with a conclusion of his, which is fair game and perfectly legit.

    But what made him a betrayer?

    Or is the standard now that any military officer that offers what was a relatively mixed bag report is fairgame for character assasination by those in congress who themselves have not the character to do their own mud slinging and instead outsource MoveOn so they don’t have to face the repurcussions of their actions.

    How cowardly. And on matters of national security too.

  17. National security? Seriously depleting our National Guard by mobilizing them in a country several thousand miles away, breaking our national budget to do so, bankrupting our ability to respond to domestic crises because we’re tied down overseas, eroding rule of law in a manner that belittles our historical claims to national integrity and international leadership, decreasing rather than increasing our ability to secure international support for our policies, and increasing rather than decreasing the likelihood of future terrorism against US targets of opportunity…I guess I’m not getting how you’re construing this as a matter of national security, because as a matter of national security, it’s been a cock-up of monumental proportions. If your position is that this is (or should be) about national security, then you need to be getting furious right about now that money and lives are being spent so foolishly.

  18. The difference is that the attack portraying him as a traitor was released before he even delivered his testimony. It was a pre-emptive attack on whatever he was going to say.

    It did not matter who he was. He could have been any other general and the attack on his character would have been the same. We have the right to question military leaders, with the notable exceptions of war heroes like John Kerry and Max Cleland, but this wasn’t a question. It was a pre-emptive smear campaign underwritten by the Democrats’ puppeteer.

    The Harry Reid puppet sit’s on Eli Pariser’s lap. Eli does the talking and the Harry’s puppet lips don’t move. You’re asking me to ignore the hand up his ass.

  19. I would like to know WHO within the Move On organization placed the ad and how early it was submitted.

    Actually, from an advertising/promotional standpoint it’s as brilliant at Geico’s Gecko.
    Petraeus/Betray Us. Who will ever forget the connection?

    Petraeus is presumably Greek….as, I believe, was Spartacus, a valliant slave of the Roman Empire.

    If Move On was saying to our America’s leading General….”say to an illegitimate leader ‘I am Spartacus,'” then what’s wrong with that?

    We still have freedom of speech, don’t we?

    If, on the other hand, no one will come foreward from the Move On group to take credit for the placement of the ad….look to the Bush camp…particularly Young and Rubicam, the Bush related advertising and public relationtions firm that created the Willie Horton ad. Such whinning has all the earmarks of a cutout plot, as well.

    Presidents and Generals who can’t take the heat should stay out of the kitchen…particularly when the best of the cooks have already bailed out because the KITCHEN IS ON FIRE!

    More importantly, what would Col. Theodore Westhusing, the beloved ethics teacher at West Point and lover of Greek contributions to Western Civilization say about the ad were he alive? And if you don’t know who Col Westhusing is, you haven’t read Christian Miller’s BLOOD MONEY.

    Speaking of Gecko’s…that pretty well describes the spinless US Senate. Senate…repeat after me…”I am Spartacus!” “No, I am Spartacus.” “No, here I am.”


  20. who has actually read the ad I wonder?

    General Petraeus or General Betrayus?

    Cooking the books for the White House
    (Click here for the thinking behind the ad)
    General Petraeus is a military man constantly at war with the facts. In 2004, just before the election, he said there was “tangible progress“ in Iraq and that “Iraqi leaders are stepping forward.”
    Washington Post, “Battling for Iraq,” by David H. Petraeus. 9/26/04 (see below)
    And last week Petraeus, the architect of the escalation of troops in Iraq , said ”We say we have achieved progress, and we are obviously going to do everything we can to build on that progress.”
    The Australian, “Surge Working: Top US General,” by Dennis Shanahan. 8/31/07
    Every independent report on the ground situation in Iraq shows that the surge strategy has failed.
    GAO report, 9/4/07
    NIE report, 8/23/07
    Jones report, CSIS, 9/6/07
    Independent AP investigation, 9/1/07
    Independent L.A. Times investigation, 9/1/07
    Yet the General claims a reduction in violence. That’s because, according to the New York Times, the Pentagon has adopted a bizarre formula for keeping tabs on violence. For example, deaths by car bombs don’t count.
    “Time to Take a Stand,” by Paul Krugman. 9/7/07
    The Washington Post reported that assassinations only count if you’re shot in the back of the head — not the front.
    “Experts Doubt Drop in Violence in Iraq,” by Karen DeYoung. 9/6/07 l
    According to news reports, there have been more civilian deaths and more American soldier deaths in the past three months than in any other summer we’ve been there.
    The Associated Press, “Violence Appears to Be Shifting from Baghdad.” 8/25/07
    National Public Radio, “Statistics the Weapon of Choice in Surge Debate,” by Guy Raz. 9/6/07
    Associated Press, “Key Figures About Iraq Since the War Began in 2003.” 9/5/07
    We’ll hear of neighborhoods where violence has decreased. But we won’t hear that those neighborhoods have been ethnically cleansed.
    Newsweek, “Baghdad’s New Owners,” by Babak Dehghanpisheh and Larry Kaplow, 9/10/07
    Ibid from the AP, “Violence Appears to be Shifting From Baghdad”
    McClatchy, “Despite Violence Drop, Officers See Bleak Future for Iraq,” by Leila Fadel. 8/15/07
    The New York Times, “More Iraqis Said to Flee Since Troop Rise,” by James Glanz and Stephen Farrell. 8/24/07
    Most importantly, General Petraeus will not admit what everyone knows; Iraq is mired in an unwinnable religious civil war.
    We may hear of a plan to withdraw a few thousand American troops.
    The New York Times, “Petraeus, Seeing Gains in Iraq as Fragile, is Wary of Cuts,” by David Sanger and David Cloud, 9/7/07
    The Washington Post, “Petraeus Open to Pullout of One Brigade,” by Robin Wright and Jonathan Weisman. 9/7/07.
    But we won’t hear what Americans are desperate to hear: a timetable for withdrawing all our troops. General Petraeus has actually said American troops will need to stay in Iraq for as long as ten years.
    The Hill, “Rep. Schakowsky: Petraeus hints at decade-long Iraq presence,” by Patrick FitzGerald. 8/10/07
    Today before Congress and before the American people, General Petraeus is likely to become General Betray Us.

    The Washington Post, 9/26/04
    Battling for Iraq

    BYLINE: David H. Petraeus

    SECTION: Editorial; B07

    LENGTH: 1239 words

    Helping organize, train and equip nearly a quarter-million of Iraq’s security forces is a daunting task. Doing so in the middle of a tough insurgency increases the challenge enormously, making the mission akin to repairing an aircraft while in flight — and while being shot at. Now, however, 18 months after entering Iraq, I see tangible progress. Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt from the ground up.
    The institutions that oversee them are being reestablished from the top down. And Iraqi leaders are stepping forward, leading their country and their security forces courageously in the face of an enemy that has shown a willingness to do anything to disrupt the establishment of the new Iraq.
    In recent months, I have observed thousands of Iraqis in training and then watched as they have conducted numerous operations. Although there have been reverses — not to mention horrific terrorist attacks — there has been progress in the effort to enable Iraqis to shoulder more of the load for their own security, something they are keen to do. The future undoubtedly will be full of difficulties, especially in places such as Fallujah. We must expect setbacks and recognize that not every soldier or policeman we help train will be equal to the challenges ahead.
    Nonetheless, there are reasons for optimism. Today approximately 164,000 Iraqi police and soldiers (of which about 100,000 are trained and equipped) and an additional 74,000 facility protection forces are performing a wide variety of security missions. Equipment is being delivered. Training is on track and increasing in capacity. Infrastructure is being repaired. Command and control structures and institutions are being reestablished.
    Most important, Iraqi security forces are in the fight — so much so that they are suffering substantial casualties as they take on more and more of the burdens to achieve security in their country. Since Jan. 1 more than 700 Iraqi security force members have been killed, and hundreds of Iraqis seeking to volunteer for the police and military have been killed as well.
    Six battalions of the Iraqi regular army and the Iraqi Intervention Force are now conducting operations. Two of these battalions, along with the Iraqi commando battalion, the counterterrorist force, two Iraqi National Guard battalions and thousands of policemen recently contributed to successful operations in Najaf. Their readiness to enter and clear the Imam Ali shrine was undoubtedly a key factor in enabling Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani to persuade members of the Mahdi militia to lay down their arms and leave the shrine.
    In another highly successful operation several days ago, the Iraqi counterterrorist force conducted early-morning raids in Najaf that resulted in the capture of several senior lieutenants and 40 other members of that militia, and the seizure of enough weapons to fill nearly four 71/2-ton dump trucks.
    Within the next 60 days, six more regular army and six additional Intervention Force battalions will become operational. Nine more regular army battalions will complete training in January, in time to help with security missions during the Iraqi elections at the end of that month.
    Iraqi National Guard battalions have also been active in recent months. Some 40 of the 45 existing battalions — generally all except those in the Fallujah-Ramadi area — are conducting operations on a daily basis, most alongside coalition forces, but many independently. Progress has also been made in police training. In the past week alone, some 1,100 graduated from the basic policing course and five specialty courses. By early spring, nine academies in Iraq and one in Jordan will be graduating a total of 5,000 police each month from the eight-week course, which stresses patrolling and investigative skills, substantive and procedural legal knowledge, and proper use of force and weaponry, as well as pride in the profession and adherence to the police code of conduct.
    Iraq’s borders are long, stretching more than 2,200 miles. Reducing the flow of extremists and their resources across the borders is critical to success in the counterinsurgency. As a result, with support from the Department of Homeland Security, specialized training for Iraq’s border enforcement elements began earlier this month in Jordan.
    Regional academies in Iraq have begun training as well, and more will come online soon. In the months ahead, the 16,000-strong border force will expand to 24,000 and then 32,000. In addition, these forces will be provided with modern technology, including vehicle X-ray machines, explosive-detection devices and ground sensors.
    Outfitting hundreds of thousands of new Iraqi security forces is difficult and complex, and many of the units are not yet fully equipped. But equipment has begun flowing. Since July 1, for example, more than 39,000 weapons and 22 million rounds of ammunition have been delivered to Iraqi forces, in addition to 42,000 sets of body armor, 4,400 vehicles, 16,000 radios and more than 235,000 uniforms.
    Considerable progress is also being made in the reconstruction and refurbishing of infrastructure for Iraq’s security forces. Some $1 billion in construction to support this effort has been completed or is underway, and five Iraqi bases are already occupied by entire infantry brigades.
    Numbers alone cannot convey the full story. The human dimension of this effort is crucial. The enemies of Iraq recognize how much is at stake as Iraq reestablishes its security forces. Insurgents and foreign fighters continue to mount barbaric attacks against police stations, recruiting centers and military installations, even though the vast majority of the population deplores such attacks. Yet despite the sensational attacks, there is no shortage of qualified recruits volunteering to join Iraqi security forces. In the past couple of months, more than 7,500 Iraqi men have signed up for the army and are preparing to report for basic training to fill out the final nine battalions of the Iraqi regular army. Some 3,500 new police recruits just reported for training in various locations. And two days after the recent bombing on a street outside a police recruiting location in Baghdad, hundreds of Iraqis were once again lined up inside the force protection walls at another location — where they were greeted by interim Prime Minister Ayad Allawi.
    I meet with Iraqi security force leaders every day. Though some have given in to acts of intimidation, many are displaying courage and resilience in the face of repeated threats and attacks on them, their families and their comrades. I have seen their determination and their desire to assume the full burden of security tasks for Iraq.
    There will be more tough times, frustration and disappointment along the way. It is likely that insurgent attacks will escalate as Iraq’s elections approach. Iraq’s security forces are, however, developing steadily and they are in the fight. Momentum has gathered in recent months. With strong Iraqi leaders out front and with continued coalition — and now NATO — support, this trend will continue. It will not be easy, but few worthwhile things are.
    The writer, an Army lieutenant general, commands the Multinational Security Transition Command in Iraq. He previously commanded the 101st Airborne Division, which was deployed in Iraq from March 2003 until February 2004.

Comments are closed.