Moveon.org Condemned by House

Off Topic Politics, World Issues
1

WASHINGTON The House on Wednesday overwhelmingly voted to condemn the liberal advocacy group MoveOn.org for a recent advertisement attacking the top U.S. general in Iraq.

By a 341-79 vote, the House passed a resolution praising the patriotism Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, and condemning a MoveOn.org ad that referred to Petraeus as “General Betray Us.”

The liberal group’s full-page ad appeared earlier this month in The New York Times and has served as a rallying point for Republicans. President Bush called the ad “disgusting” and criticized Democrats such as Sen. Hillary Clinton, the front-runner for the party’s nomination, for being afraid of irritating the group.

“Such unwarranted attacks should be strongly condemned by Republicans and Democrats alike,” said Rep. Jerry Lewis, R-Calif., during brief debate on the resolution."

Now, there’s no doubt that such ads give ‘aid and comfort’ (hope) to the enemy. Should George Soros be put on trial for treason?

2

Is the military exempt from criticism?

And you have got to be kidding about the treason bit.

3

Petraitorous is an ass hat. His boss said as much. When an admiral says you’re a sissy, then you’re a sissy. Petraitorous was the water boy for the official white house stance and even spoke contrary to the counter insurgency manual HE HIMSELF WROTE to buy time foe shrubya.

It’s a sham. The repubicans played him for the sucker he is and who cares what the house does…wow, they condemn it- a bunch of idiots beholden to the voters in primary season. Thankfully the democrats who matter didn’t play into that little charade.

Let the repubicans hold petraitorous up like god almighty and praise the soldiers while at the same time having homosexual bathroom interludes, vetoing health care coverage for kids, and voting to have soldiers use substandard mil issue armor and having them pay out of pocket for the good stuff that could save their lives.

Oh, and also let’s not forget the denial of gulf war syndrome, and ignoring traumatic head trauma, and cutting veterans’ benefits.

Hell of a way to support the troops…it’s a good slogan for the ad campaigns but none of them give a shit. Don’t believe me? Just ask any of that psycho romney’s 5 kids who never enlisted in the wonderful all volunteer army of ours.

4

Wow!

Dear Congress,

Please grow a sack and tackle some REAL issues.

Love,

buffballswell

5

George Soros is a total bastard in my opinion, but if you feel that he should be put on treason for funding moveon, you need to remove the veil.

Every time they open their mouths someone from the GOP or someone who cares about a victory of the century at a high cost gets ten votes.

Not that high GOP support is ALWAYS a good thing but you see my point here. Should we put the folks at loose change on trial for treason? Or maybe Michael Moore? Not at all. Mainly since the above rule applies to them as well.

6

[quote]FreedomFighterXL wrote:
George Soros is a total bastard in my opinion, but if you feel that he should be put on treason for funding moveon, you need to remove the veil.

Every time they open their mouths someone from the GOP or someone who cares about a victory of the century at a high cost gets ten votes.

Not that high GOP support is ALWAYS a good thing but you see my point here. Should we put the folks at loose change on trial for treason? Or maybe Michael Moore? Not at all. Mainly since the above rule applies to them as well.[/quote]

If it were 1944 and someone took out an ad calling Eisenhauer or Patton a cowardly traitor, what would have happened?

IMHO, freedom of speech does NOT extend to helping our enemies perceive that they have support for their cause in our country. I can’t believe that our Constitution would guarantee such rights. Does it? I’m no Constitutional scholar or anything like that, but they might want to rewrite the thing if so(and make taxation in any way unconstitutional, while they’re at it).

7

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Now, there’s no doubt that such ads give ‘aid and comfort’ (hope) to the enemy.[/quote]

Because you say so? Is that the qualification for something giving aid and comfort to an enemy, it makes you angry? What aid did it give any enemy? Did it give any enemy more means to harm us? Is moveon.org handing out IEDs to insurgents? Comfort? What the fuck does that even mean? They’re all warm and fuzzy now because somebody said something against the military? Really? Well we all better stop criticizing everything just to be absolutely safe and keep our enemies in distress.

After all, we’re at war, and I for one would hate to lose our country and precious freedoms to these terrorists and be forced to live a life where I can’t speak my mind and have to live however the rulers dictate.

Anyone who speaks out against the war is helping the terrorists? Should we all wear identical clothes to hide any individual form of expression, start reading some neocon manifesto and chanting gogogo Bush? Would that take away comfort from our enemies? If we turned into an authoritarian state?

If he did anything treasonous, yes. But for exercising his rights, no. As much as you would like to have people who say things you hate locked up, this is still America. Why not even bring up Bush putting the General in the political arena to begin with? If there is supposed to be that line between politics and the military, the President surely can’t inject the General into the political arena and then claim it’s unfair when he is attacked by political groups.

Bush put him there to sell a policy, that is not his job and the position Bush placed him in was unfair. Where’s your anger for that? Taking complete advantage of the military is fine, but saying something bad about them isn’t? It’s okay now for a Military official to be used as a political prop, but it’s not okay to treat him as such?

To echo every talking head pundit show since this happened.

“More time at home for the troops? Naaa. Spend time voting to say an ad is bad/mean? Sure as hell yes. We’re congress, what the fuck else are we going to do?”

Is this honestly the best we can do? No wonder they have an approval rating of 11%, fucking pathetic.

P.S. It wasn’t even a good pun. For as much money as that ad must have cost, make it worth a damn second look for something other than shock value. I’ve found knock knock jokes more humorous than this shit. Moveon.org needs better writers.

8

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If it were 1944 and someone took out an ad calling Eisenhauer or Patton a cowardly traitor, what would have happened?
[/quote]

Why would they have? Neither Eisenauer or Patton got up and read a report written by the white house to congress in an attempt to gain support for WWII.

The situations are completely different, WWII =/= Iraq, Petraeus =/= Patton.

None of that is to say anything against Petreaeus of course, but when he was put into the political realm to do a POLITICIANS job, he became fair game. If you don’t want to see the military attacked by a liberal group (although it will probably happen by some group no matter what you do) don’t take a general and make him a politician in uniform. It’s unfair to him and to the American public to put them both in that position. Because a guy in uniform said it, we can’t question it?

Fuck moveon.org by the way. I hate sounding like I’m defending them. It’s a larger issue than just this ad though, it’s an issue of freedom of speech. Nowhere is it written that any part of America is exempt from criticism or debate, Petraeus and the military are no exception. Fuck moveon.org, again.

I wish groups like them would go away so we could talk about this shit in a context where they are not part of the debate, they cheapen one side of the argument just by being mentioned.

9

[quote]USNS physique wrote:
Oh, and also let’s not forget the denial of gulf war syndrome, and ignoring traumatic head trauma, and cutting veterans’ benefits.[/quote]

Yea, cuz a democrat has never has NEVER done that, yea!, yea!!, yea!!!

Did you ever consider that this Admiral’s motivation may have been personal politics? Nooooooo, couldn’t have been. High ranking officers shun politics as a matter of ethics. /sarcasm

10

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
If it were 1944 and someone took out an ad calling Eisenhauer or Patton a cowardly traitor, what would have happened?[/quote]

Amazing! Really.

Is there any topic where you guys might not drag WWII in?

11

[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
If it were 1944 and someone took out an ad calling Eisenhauer or Patton a cowardly traitor, what would have happened?

Amazing! Really.

Is there any topic where you guys might not drag WWII in?[/quote]

WOW…really! Is there a topic where you won’t post your opinions about how we act live and speak???

They guy makes a valid point which you have no basis or experience with to criticize.

12

[quote]Rockscar wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
If it were 1944 and someone took out an ad calling Eisenhauer or Patton a cowardly traitor, what would have happened?

Amazing! Really.

Is there any topic where you guys might not drag WWII in?

WOW…really! Is there a topic where you won’t post your opinions about how we act live and speak???

They guy makes a valid point which you have no basis or experience with to criticize.[/quote]

It’s not really valid because nobody called Petaeus a cowardly traitor–see the difference?

13

[quote]buffballswell wrote:
Wow!

Dear Congress,

Please grow a sack and tackle some REAL issues.

Love,

buffballswell[/quote]

Seriously, what a complete waste of time…
I’m so sick of this fake outrage.

14

[quote]100meters wrote:
buffballswell wrote:
Wow!

Dear Congress,

Please grow a sack and tackle some REAL issues.

Love,

buffballswell

Seriously, what a complete waste of time…
I’m so sick of this fake outrage.
[/quote]

No Masshole, your the complete waste of time.

15

[quote]buffballswell wrote:
100meters wrote:
buffballswell wrote:
Wow!

Dear Congress,

Please grow a sack and tackle some REAL issues.

Love,

buffballswell

Seriously, what a complete waste of time…
I’m so sick of this fake outrage.

No Masshole, your the complete waste of time.[/quote]

Noted to never totally agree with buffballswell.

16

[quote]Magnate wrote:

If he did anything treasonous, yes. But for exercising his rights, no. As much as you would like to have people who say things you hate locked up, this is still America. [/quote]

Do you think someone has the right to mutilate YOUR name in public, to hold YOUR name up for ridicule, and imply that you are a traitor? That you, who may have devoted your entire life to protecting our country, should be spat upon in advertising, in the New York Times?

At minimum, George Soros and his minions should get hit for slander. If his message serves to inspire those who would car bomb our troops, then he and his bunch are accessories to murder. Treason is a possibility.

17

Great! Now that that is out of the way can we get to fixing Social Security, immigration reform, fixing our public school system, etc?

With all of the problems we’re facing these people are wasting my money “condemning” a newspaper article? This congress is a fucking joke. Both parties. Absolutely disgusting that Republicans are playing politics like this with an advertisement, but don’t think for a second Democrats wouldn’t be doing the same thing if the roles were reversed. Absolutely disgusting.

18

[quote]Moriarty wrote:
Great! Now that that is out of the way can we get to fixing Social Security, immigration reform, fixing our public school system, etc?

With all of the problems we’re facing these people are wasting my money “condemning” a newspaper article? This congress is a fucking joke. Both parties. Absolutely disgusting that Republicans are playing politics like this with an advertisement, but don’t think for a second Democrats wouldn’t be doing the same thing if the roles were reversed. Absolutely disgusting.[/quote]

Those problems never will be fixed. Congress justifies its increasing power by CREATING problems. If the problems are ever ‘fixed’, then the reasons for expanding their powers goes away.

Think of Congress as like a pharmaceutical company: if you are really cured, you stop buying their snake oil. Where’s the profit in that?

19

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Magnate wrote:

If he did anything treasonous, yes. But for exercising his rights, no. As much as you would like to have people who say things you hate locked up, this is still America.

Do you think someone has the right to mutilate YOUR name in public, to hold YOUR name up for ridicule, and imply that you are a traitor? That you, who may have devoted your entire life to protecting our country, should be spat upon in advertising, in the New York Times?

At minimum, George Soros and his minions should get hit for slander. If his message serves to inspire those who would car bomb our troops, then he and his bunch are accessories to murder. Treason is a possibility.

[/quote]
You realize that “Betray us” refers to being less than honest (as he was and had been in the past) not to betray us in the benedict arnold sense?

Also the inspiration for carbombing us is our presence? Which he and the admin advocate? Which makes them accessories to murder in your eyes?

Of course I realize all this outrage is fake and a diversion tactic since nobody is caring that Limbaugh calls soldiers phony, or Hagel senator betray us, or the slander of Kerry, Cleeland etc. all to a much more severe degree.

20

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Do you think someone has the right to mutilate YOUR name in public, to hold YOUR name up for ridicule, and imply that you are a traitor? [/quote]

Yes, they do have that right. Republicans made a habit of calling anyone that decanted a traitor, or that they gave “aid and comfort to our enemies”, tantamount to the same message, that anyone who disagrees is a traitor. Why is it okay for you to call moveon.org a traitorous organization, you seem to think such speech should not be protected.

The attack was tasteless (the betray us line specifically), but nobody is exempt from this no matter how many medals they have.

That’s more reasonable, I don’t see a problem if the General takes them to court in a civil suit for that ad.

Once again, anyone who doesn’t agree with you is giving aid to the enemy. You can’t know if they receive “aid” or “comfort” from anything, and it’s sure as hell not like they were 1 week from ceasing combat but then this ad gave them the boost in the moral they need to go and blow up some more people.