Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Murtha:  General Petraeus is a puppet for the White House

Funny, I seem to recall a lot of Democrats supporting his appointment.  Which I guess was just so that they could cut off his funding, deny the truth of his accounts about who we’re fighting in Iraq, and in essence, paint the military as part of the great neocon conspiracy to keep us fighting in Iraq on behalf of Halliburton and the monied Jews.

Petraeus?  An administration automaton—a political mouthpiece who is allowing his soldiers to be killed for a lie.

So argues this despicable, hoary, bloated old asp.

It’s like the anti-war “progressives” have hit the life rewind button and taken us back to 1974.  In fact, the only reason we can be certain we’re not really there is that John Kerry doesn’t have any more medals to toss over the White House fence, and Jane Fonda’s bad hip won’t let her climb up on any heavy vehicle gun turrets.

Plus, I’m not wearing bellbottoms and listening to Gallery.  At least, not on a regular basis.

97 Replies to “Murtha:  General Petraeus is a puppet for the White House”

  1. Dan Collins says:

    Well, I’m not sure what you’re getting at here, Jeff, but maybe George Tenet would let Kerry throw his Medal of Honor over the White House fence, since security’s too tight for ding-dong-ditch.

  2. RTO Trainer says:

    AND… he doesn’t think we have troops in Afghanistan anymore.

  3. his ignorance is just… I don’t have words.

  4. The_Real_JeffS says:

    So argues this despicable, hoary, bloated old asp

    I dislike any snakes, but they do have a purpose in the food chain.  Even poisonous ones.  So comparing Murtha to a snake is simply aiming too high, and insulting to snakes as well. 

    You might try “virus”, especially those associated with STDs…..God knows the senile old shit is doing his best to screw the country over.

  5. Jeff Goldstein says:

    I was thinking of venom-tongued, but sure.  Let’s make him into some kind of retrovirus.

  6. Gallery…who are they (says the 25 year old)…is this analog stuff…reel to reel (*cough cough*).  Somewhere someone is arguing about the fidelity of vinyl.

  7. TODD says:

    Murtha watches too much clown pr0n

  8. JD says:

    Weren’t these fucksticks telling us how we should be listening to the Generals on the ground ?  Then, when the Generals on the ground, that they approved, come to Washington, the libs either ignore them (Pelosi and Reid) or call them hacks (Murtha).  Is it any wonder why we cannot trust these people with the military?  They demand more troops.  They are given more troops, and then immediately vote to surrender and cut off funding.  They demand a new strategy, and then when given one, run out and declare our loss.  Hell, I would not trust them with a batallion of GI Joe dolls, much less real American heroes.

  9. JPS says:

    As a patriot above all, I would like the Democrats to be a responsible party, because it’s good for America.

    Distinctly secondary to the above, as a conservative Republican I would like the Democrats to be strong (though not dominant), to keep my party sharp and honest.  Which let’s face it, a lot of the time it’s neither.

    Distinctly tertiary to both of the above, as an only-human partisan I figure if they can’t live up to the above–and I still wish they would and hope they will–they might as well make freakin’ jackasses of themselves.  Thanks, Colonel Murtha!

  10. J. Peden says:

    Speaking of Jane Fonda – Mad Mag. lampooned her as “Fonda Peters” quite a while back – Jane has recently advertised the quality of her wares, on TCM, as ~ “being paid to go into those unexplored places where people otherwise never go… I wanted to go all the way”: hence The Vagina Monologues, I say, as I think Bilbo Baggins would also say. But who speaks for the colon?

  11. MCPO Airdale says:

    Murtha lies without hesitation. This is a gift that the idiot voters of Johnstown, PA must find invaluable. That, or the county home for those suffering mild senile dementia was full.

  12. daleyrocks says:

    Remember that two years ago Murtha was whining that Bush wouldn’t invite him to the White House so that Murtha could tell him how ro save the day.  Now Murtha is whining that Petraeus isn’t talking to him.

    He doesn’t really want Petraeus to talk to him, just like Nancy and Harry didn’t want to hear what he had to say or believe what he had to say.  Their concern is that Petraeus might actually do some good over there or give encouragement to the American people that Iraq can be stabilized.  Where would Nancy, Harry, Jack and the Sorosphere be then?  Up shit creek with their asses hanging out after all the energy they’ve invested in defeat.

    Their only option at this point is to attack potential messengers of decent news such as Petraeus.  Nancy decided to send out Murtha because everybody thinks he’s lost it anyway.

  13. John Murtha's Okinawan Forward Operating Base says:

    So close I can taste it. . .

  14. DemocracyRules says:

    I am SO SURPRISED at you people.  You do not seem to be able to see the nose on your face.  Pelosi and the whole Democrat gang are ‘proressivists’ and moral relativists.  Progressives are a form of gradualist socialist, and of course they DO hate Bush and Republicans with a venom. As far as they are concerned, the war is between them and Bush, Islamists as a backdrop.  To defeat Bush, they MUST rob him of victory anywhere, and especially in war.  Like Romans, Americans highly value war victories. 

    To keep power, to gain the Presidency and both houses, Bush must be prevented from winning anything.  This is high Moral Relativism, where treachery is irrelevant.  The issue is the pursuit of what they see as the highest moral good, which is progressivist supremacy.  Sheesh… doesn’t anyone read Marx anymore?

  15. topsecretk9 says:

    Murtha is a pig…and now not to subject hijack, but to fully realize the substance of stupidity that is the Dem party… this firedoglake post is truly something to behold.

  16. Mark says:

    and listening to Gallery.

    Hmm, my copies of the magazine didn’t come with those little glossy punch out 45 records (just 38s).

  17. George S. "Butch" Patton (Mrs.) says:

    It’s the 40th Anniversary of The Summer of Love… Take a Stick to a Hippie Today!

    TW although74 had hotter babes…

  18. J. Peden says:

    DemocracyRules, speaking at least for myself, your point is very well taken.

  19. N. O'Brain says:

    Murtha:  General Petraeus is a puppet for the White House

    Well, considering that the President is the Commander-in-Chief, I suppose that that’s technically true…..

  20. Rob B. says:

    Murtha would know a puppet when he see’s one since he has Pelosi’s hand so far up his ass that when she scratches her head he tastes Head and Soulder Shampoo.

  21. DrSteve says:

    Wasn’t Petraeus required to make these classified briefings?  Maybe because he agreed to do so during his confirmation hearings?  The idea that he made some elective decision to come here and market the plan to the Hill is lacking in support, to say the least.

    Reid made the same intimations about Petraeus last week too—“he’s being taken all around Washington; I think he’s doing the best he can.” Suggesting, I guess, that Petraeus is under Administration pressure to lie.

    Also, what’s disturbing me (most) right now is that Reid et al. keep talking about conditions and benchmarks, but we see how they dismiss any reports of progress from Petraeus.  I would expect they’d do the same when the Iraqis’ next progress checkpoint came up.  So this gives the lie to the idea that anyone but Reid, Pelosi, Murtha, et al. are in control of the exit timeline, or that any but the earliest set of withdrawal dates are the operational ones.

  22. Rob B. says:

    By the way, has Gleen weighed in on the puppetry? I hear that issue is right in his wheel house of expertise.

  23. Major John says:

    Murtha used to anger me.  Now I just shake my head in wonder…

  24. topsecretk9 says:

    Also, what’s disturbing me (most) right now is that Reid et al. keep talking about conditions and benchmarks, but we see how they dismiss any reports of progress from Petraeus.

    Bastards treated the Iraqi elections the same way – spit in the Iraqi’s face and said it didn’t mean anything (nothing to celebrate). I’m not tiptoeing anymore. They are pro-terror, pro-defeat, anti-victory – pure and simple.

  25. happyfeet says:

    There was one person in the White House who had primary responsibility to get the intelligence about Iraq right – and that was Secretary Rice who was then President George W. Bush’s national security adviser,” said committee Chairman Henry Waxman, a California Democrat.

    The American public was misled about the threat posed by Iraq, and this committee is going to do its part to find out why,” Waxman said.

    By disputing Petraeus’ assertion that Al Qaeda is central to the conflict in Iraq, Murtha is alleging that Petraeus, and by extension, the Administration, is misleading the American public about the threat posed by Iraq. Why is Waxman’s committee not going to do its part to find out why?

  26. Phil from Tacoma says:

    Plus, I’m not wearing bellbottoms and listening to Gallery.  At least, not on a regular basis.

    Like, speak for yourself, dude…

    SB: actually44

    Shhhh!…

  27. Mark says:

    Murtha used to anger me.  Now I just shake my head in wonder…

    Reminds me of Elvis Costello’s “Red Shoes” as in “I used to be disgusted, now I try to be amused.”

    Except there’s nothing amusing about Murtha’s agenda. The really sad thing is, I think they’ve been so far removed from reality for so long that they (that’d be Pelosi, DiFi, Reid et. al.) don’t even realize they have a surrender agenda—they think they’re forwarding the “you terrorists aren’t all that bad, let’s just get along” foreign policy…

    Scary stuff.

  28. I can’t recall a time in American history when political advantage was allowed to do so much harm to American interests and to threaten the actual lives of soldiers.

    I was tempted to say “… except the ‘60’s and the Vietnam War” but I think that this has exceeded then.  The actual political class had only a few members who undermined American interests during that war – the bulk of those aiding the enemy were outside that class in the ‘60’s.

  29. SteveG says:

    The Democrats that “supported” Petraeus obviously had their fingers crossed.

    Intelligence on Iraq from the late 90’ up until the war?

    Same thing.

    Then political expediency took over.

    The Democrats have redefined the word support.

    They support the troops, but undermine their every effort.

    They support the troops but every dead soldier, every failure furthers their political agenda

  30. Major John says:

    They support the troops but every dead soldier, every failure furthers their political agenda

    While Murtha cannot anger me any more, Schumer/Reid remarks in that vein still can.

  31. J. Peden says:

    Murtha is a pig…and now not to subject hijack, but to fully realize the substance of stupidity that is the Dem party… this firedoglake post is truly something to behold.

    Yea, it is so truely something to behold that not even the great Gnarles Barkley’s Crazy dared touch upon it:

    I remember when, I remember when I lost my mind

    There was something so special about that place

    Even your emotions had so much space

    And when you’re out there, was out there, yeah I was out of touch

    It wasn’t that I didn’t know enough

    I just knew too much

    Does that make me crazy

    Does that make me crazy

    Does that make me crazy

    Possibly

    Well, come on now, Who do you, Who do you, Who do you think you are

    Ha Ha Ha, bless your soul

    You really think you’re in control

    Well, I think you’re crazy

    I think you’re crazy

    I think you’re carzy

    Just like me….

    But, No, not even close with firedonglake Dems. The quantum levels have been rendered totally irrelevant when considering that craziness, not to mention E=mcc.

  32. Mikey NTH says:

    Major John, Rep. Murtha is a hawk when it comes to military appropriations.

    Back in the 1920’s and 1930’s the navy had the same problem when it came to the Newport Torpedo Station.  It wasn’t whether the navy had good workers or whether a good product would be produced by those workers.  It was whether a good employer would stay there and keep the right people employed.  You know – voters.

    live35.  The torpedos weren’t; that was the problem!

  33. Major John says:

    Mikey, ironically I am trying to slap a paper together on submarine development between WWI and II…so I just learned a bit about that of which you speak!

    Nelseco engines for everyone!

  34. Embarassed to get the Gallery reference says:

    There’s a town on Chesapeake Bay

    Under a dome, where the Dems hold sway

    I said Murtha, fetch another round

    He serves us timetables and whine

    Jack Murtha, you’re a fine girl, fine girl

    What a good wife you would be, would be

    But my love, my life and my lady

    Is Bushie

  35. happyfeet says:

    How is that ironic?

  36. BornRed says:

    How is that ironic?

    It seems more like serendipitous to me, or synergistic, or co-inky-dinkal, or somethin’.

    TW: Like I said, more71.

  37. Major John says:

    Mikey used the example of the Newport Torpedo Station.  I was spending time crawling around obscure submarine literature learning what I could have found right from a PW commenter.  D’oh!

  38. Major John says:

    And now, back to the obscure submarine literature!

  39. happyfeet says:

    Ok, but it seems like the irony would have to be founded on an assumption that PW commenters are not generally understood to be a font of useful and arcane knowledge. Which would be a solid assumption if it was just me here. Let me know if you have a paper coming up on Whit Stillman films.

  40. happyfeet says:

    His early ouevre.

  41. Robert says:

    Gen. Zachary Taylor: “Old Rough and Ready.”

    Gen. Winfield Scott: “Old Fuss and Feathers.”

    Gen. George S. Patton: “Old Blood and Guts.”

    Col. John Murtha: “Old Cut and Run.”

  42. Lew Clark says:

    Lefties never read obscure submarine literature.  So we still have that tactical advantage.

    Or would that be a strategic advantage?  I can never keep those straight.

  43. The Ghost of Abu Musab Al Zarqawi says:

    Infidels, congressman Murtha appears to be a doddering fool, but he is not completely silly.  Your Democratic party has staked its entire future on its country’s defeat.  It cannot allow this war to be won.  To ensure defeat it must destroy the credibility of the american military.  That is Jack Murtha’s job.  There will be great pressure on Jim Webb to follow suit very soon, I suspect.

    Do not look for a compromise on your Iraq budget.  Instead look for much more of this.  that is why a united Democratic Party sent David Border a nastygram recently.  They cannot have one of their own ( a media person) straying from the reservation now, not when they are making their (or rather my) next great strategic move.

    If a right leaning journalist had even one brain inhis skull he would be well advised to spend a little time digging into Congressman Murtha’s adbscam dealings and Seantor Reid’s land dealings.  Otherwise these two men will make certain General Petraeus has a very rocky ride indeed.

    I tell you these things becuase I am confident that no right leaning journalist will make any attenmpt to look into said land dealings or said abscam case.  Whether that is the result of stupidity or laziness I will leave up to you.

  44. George S. "Butch" Patton (Mrs.) says:

    If the lefties read obscure submarine literature, we’d still be producing conventional boats with Hooven, Owens, Rentschler Co., engines.  Extremely loud and unreliable.

    HOR’s at sea and in Congress have that in common.

    In one of the SF novels in my “to finish writing” pile, I named three very close female navy types Fairbansk, Morse and Perkins.

    You know, marine diesels who go down a lot…

  45. Wendya says:

    This is high Moral Relativism, where treachery is irrelevant.

    Kind of reminds me of Islam….

  46. furriskey says:

    You know, marine diesels who go down a lot…

    Nice one. Keats & Chapman would doff their hats to you!

  47. Sean M. says:

    I hear Okinawa’s lovely in the springtime.

  48. Kyle says:

    The top three posts each have exactly 47 comments!  I’m not sure what this is conspiricizing towards, but I damn sure know truthy conspiracies when I see them.

  49. Kyle says:

    Epiphany!

    47 is 4 and 2 from 9!!

    4/29 = 47!

    It’s so clear!

  50. alppuccino says:

    Murtha was clearly sundowning during this interview.  Who’s next on Matthews’ show?  Corky from Life Goes On talking about macro economics?

  51. DrSteve says:

    Hey Major John, you run across any Randy Papadopoulos stuff yet?  He’s a very smart young man.  Made the sub development stuff we talked about (his dissertation) very interesting.

    TW:  data57.  Shudder.

  52. N. O'Brain says:

    John Murtha is an ex-Marine.

  53. N. O'Brain says:

    “Mikey used the example of the Newport Torpedo Station.  I was spending time crawling around obscure submarine literature learning what I could have found right from a PW commenter.  D’oh!

    Posted by Major John | permalink

    on 05/02 at 09:19 PM”

    On the internet, everyone knows you’re a dog, but no one knows you’re an expert in The Duke of Wellington’s tactics.

    TW: blood31. CUT THAT OUT, JEFF!!!!

  54. Major John says:

    Next time, no matter what the subject, I’m askin’ here FIRST!

  55. Harry says:

    Major John- at the risk of pointing out something you’ve already come across, “Silent Victory” by Clay Blair Jr. has some excellent information about pre-WW II sub development. Its a huge (1071 pages) and hugely cpmprehensive compilation of the sub war in the pacific.

  56. Mikey NTH says:

    I have Silent Victory at home.

    A good read.

    A good operational history is Red Scorpion.  It deals with the war patrols of USS RasherThunder Below (USS Barb) and the one by Dick O’Kane (can’t recall the name of that one) are also very good.

  57. Jeff Goldstein says:

    Somebody confused Looking Glass (“Brandy”) with Gallery (“I Believe in Music”).

    But right ballpark.

  58. madmatt says:

    Petraeus has alread said that the war cannot be won militarily…anything else he says is a lie.

  59. way to mangle that one madmatt. short attention span? let’s try to expound on that a bit eh?

    GEN. PETRAEUS: With respect, again, to the—you know, the idea of the reconcilables and the irreconcilables, this is something in which the Iraqi government obviously has the lead. It is something that they have sought to—in some cases, to reach out. And I think, again, that any student of history recognizes that there is no military solution to a problem like that in Iraq, to the insurgency of Iraq. Military action is necessary to help improve security, for all the reasons that I stated in my remarks, but it is not sufficient.

    so I suppose you could say that it can’t be won solely by military means, but I don’t think anyone has argued that at this point. context.

  60. N. O'Brain says:

    “Petraeus has alread said that the war cannot be won militarily…anything else he says is a lie.

    Posted by madmatt | permalink

    on 05/03 at 07:57 AM”

    short attention span?

    No, the star of ‘Short Attention Span Theater’.

    TW: over34.  My guess is under 14, in Mom’s basement, eating Cheetos and drinking Amps.

  61. Blue Hen says:

    Petraeus has alread said that the war cannot be won militarily…anything else he says is a lie

    Link to this please? Can you provide context?

    If this general is supposedly running amok, then we should can him right now, before any more of the moppets are sacrificed at his puppet theater/altar.

    But then, everyone who voted for his appointment would have to explain their vote. Do you forsee this happening?

    And the finale…. If your assertion is true(everything except ‘the war cannot be won militarily’ is a lie) then why should we lend credence to this? If dear Murtha, beacon of integrity that he is, has found him wanting, does this not put into disrepute this ‘quote’ that you hold dear?

    The world wonders.

  62. Paul Zrimsek says:

    We need to nip this whole subordination thing in the bud before it spreads to the CIA.

  63. twolaneflash says:

    I can just hear the music at the 2008 Democratic National Meeting:

    “…Sweet, sweet surrender

    Live, live without care

    Like a fish in the water

    Like a bird in the air”

    lyrics from “Sweet Surrender”

    by Henry John Deutschendorf Jr.

    a.k.a. John Denver

  64. Rob Crawford says:

    Guys, I read madmatt’s comment to be a pithy expression of the left’s take on Petraeus, not his personal opinion.

    I could be wrong, but I think this is a case of friendly fire.

  65. twolaneflash says:

    In honor of only Son with 3rd ID at Camp Baharia outside Fallujah, I wore a “Iraqi Freedom – We Will Not Fail” cap on my off-bike time during my April three week motorcycle ride across America and back.  The cap was the starter of many conversations.  Every American with whom I spoke sent prayers and blessings for the safety and victory of America’s warriors, for the righteousness of their mission, and for the families of those serving.  Not one word was spoken to me in opposition to “The Long War” during my 5000+ miles.  I met dozens of people that have a good grasp of the many reasons America needs a Middle Eastern presence for the forseeable future.  As for the extension his tour to 15 months, Son writes to me:  “Yeah.  Just some more time for me to kick some ass.” Sad our elected officials don’t have the spirit of this stop-lossed 22 year old patriot.

    p.s.  I was the on the silver BMW K1200LT in a black and red riding suit that blew past you at 90+ mph in GA, AL, MS, LA, TX, NM, AZ, CA,OK, AR, or TN.  Sorry if I caused your nether regions to pucker.

  66. Blue Hen says:

    Petraeus has alread said that the war cannot be won militarily…anything else he says is a lie.

    Rob, are you reading this as sarcasm?

    If so, I’m sorry for having at him. Then I’d suggest that if he doesn’t want to take friendly fire, he shouldn’t approach this position ass-end first.

  67. Al Maviva says:

    Hey, does anybody else look at the TV coverage of Murtha, and get shocked when to find that Carrie Fischer isn’t in chains and a bikini, standing in front of him?  I find it jarring, somehow. 

    And don’t look now.  The latest lefty passion is having wank fantasies over a bloody U.S. pullout from Iraq, with the last 10,000 or 12,000 getting slaughtered in a high-intensity, fighting withdrawal.  They’ve been exceptionally touching in their handwringing exhibitions of concern over the well-being of the troops.

  68. Robert says:

    Patreus letting his soldiers die for a lie?

    I don’t know about that.

    At least Cheney is letting our soldiers die for $$$$.

  69. Blue Hen says:

    At least Cheney is letting our soldiers die for $$$$

    Can you clarify this please?

  70. Rob Crawford says:

    Rob, are you reading this as sarcasm?

    Well, I could be wrong, but I took it as the distillation of the left’s position. They get a sound bite they like from someone in the military, and then ignore that person the moment they stop saying things useful to the left.

    Kinda like they did with the generals calling for more time and more troops; now the left’s position is less time and no troops, so those generals have been rendered PNG.

  71. neitherrightnorleft says:

    Maybe you all should read the actual script of the interview. Murtha’s answers to Chris Matthew’s questions are criticisms of Bush, not of Petraeus. Obviously that won’t sit well in this forum where Bush can do no wrong but it’s not the same as “slandering the military,” or “attacking the general” as seems to be the implication of the bloggers here.

  72. Blue Hen says:

    Maybe you all should read the actual script of the interview. Murtha’s answers to Chris Matthew’s questions are criticisms of Bush, not of Petraeus. Obviously that won’t sit well in this forum where Bush can do no wrong but it’s not the same as “slandering the military,” or “attacking the general” as seems to be the implication of the bloggers here.

    Since you didn’t bother to provide a link to the script that you are telling us to read, that could be a tad dificult.

    As for what does and does not “sit well” we’ll worry about that. Please prove that Jeff’s post was false. He asserted that Murtha claimed that the General was a puppet for the White House. You claim that “Murtha’s answers to Chris Matthew’s questions are criticisms of Bush, not of Petraeus.” That should be very easy to prove.

    Note: Accusing someone of being another persons’ puppet is a criticism of both persons, not just the second person.

    Now. Dazzle us.

  73. neitherrightnorleft says:

    Here’s a link to the hardball transcript:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18438589/

    by the way. It is possible to respect General Petraeus as a good soldier and still feel that he is being “used” by a failing politician who happens to be his commander in chief. IT wouldn’t be the first time that haas happened, and not just with this president.

  74. what the? did you watch the clip?  are you saying it was edited somehow to make Murtha look more stupid than usual?

    MURTHA:  Well, I am not sure.  He made up his mind so early, I‘m not sure he even read the bill.  I mean, this is the problem with this spinning that goes on.  They bring Petraeus back, purely a political move.  Petraeus comes back here, doesn‘t talk to any of us.  He only talks to the news media, and so forth, trying to sell this program. Bush was 64 percent when his mission—mission possible, and today he‘s 34 percent, so he‘s just turned the opposite.  And this bill‘s not going to make any difference, just like what we say here makes little difference.  What‘s going to count is what happens on the ground. The Iraqis are going to have to decide it themselves.

    MURTHA:  I‘m saying—I‘m saying he came back here at the White House‘s request to purely make political statements.  That‘s what I‘m saying.  There‘s no question in my mind about it.

    well, does Congress want to be briefed on this stuff or not?  Murtha is accusing the President of already making up his mind? the guy that obviously has made up his own mind about Iraq so much so that he won’t beleive the general that’s in charge of the new strategy there? yeah, that’s smart.

    MURTHA:  This whole—whole war, ever since it diverted the attention away from where al Qaeda started, the Taliban in Afghanistan, the war in Afghanistan, where we should have stayed, ever since that time, they‘ve been trying to tie this into terrorism.  All of us know there‘s terrorism all over the world…

    what the hell? this guy is completely clueless. We still have troops in Afghanistan. in fact there are more there now than when we started.

  75. I mean, we’re also talking about the guy that said we should re-deploy forces to nearby Okinawa. Good Lord as if anyone needed more proof of what a dumbass Murtha is. It has nothing to do with Bush being infallible and everything to do with Murtha being a clueless idiot.  can you tell this makes me angry?  I’m just some lowly National Guard Seargents wife and even I know we’re still in Afghanistan and that Petraeus spoke to Congress while he was in DC and even gave Murtha and Pelosi a private call.

  76. The Ghost of Abu Musab Al Zarqawi says:

    Neitherirghtnorleft,

    Good, good.  Congressman Murtha would destroy the crediblity of the American military by calling them political hacks and liars.  You would do it by labeling them fools and morons.  Try both tactics, throw it all against the wall and see what sticks.

  77. Blue Hen says:

    1.It’s true that respecting someone and criticizing someone are not mutually exclusive.

    2. However, calling someone a puppet is a criticism that implies that the person is either allowing it, or is ignorant of being used. Neither case tends to garner respect.

    3. The second point is underscored by the oath that the General took as an American serviceman. It’s the same one that I took. He has a duty to be subordinate to the Civil Authority, and to abstain from political activity. That is not equivalent to ‘being used’, such as in willfully misrepresenting his obeservations and judgment before COngress.

  78. Blue Hen says:

    Hey Ghost!

    How’s the class reunion going down there? Have they run out of virgins in the last week?

  79. McGehee says:

    in this forum where Bush can do no wrong

    Well, you just flunked Protein Wisdom 101.

  80. JD says:

    I have found that the Moby’s that claim to be “neither right nor left” are only slightly less disingenuous than the Moby’s that claim to be former Republicans.

  81. Patrick Chester says:

    McGehee: Come on, don’t dispute the narrative, man! If every “oh-I’m-neutral-really!” troll that wanders in proclaims us to believe that Bush can do no wrong, then it must be true. It’s maaaaaaaaaagic, dude!

    wink

  82. neitherrightnorleft says:

    Thanks to all for the articulate reponses. I see things much more clearly now. It’s all in the LABELS!

  83. cause it certainly wasn’t about your towering intellect. eh, we work with what little we’re given.

  84. neitherrightnorleft says:

    You’re right..I didn’t expand my thesis fully. It’s not JUST using labels as a substitute for thinking: it’s also the name-calling that’s essential to have that criticism-proof good feeling about one’s place in the world. But I admire you for working with what little you were given. If label worship and name calling work for you, make the best of it!

  85. so still no rebuttal?  how did we misinterpret what Murtha said?  I’m missing how lying about what someone did isn’t attacking them.

  86. RTO Trainer says:

    It is possible to respect General Petraeus as a good soldier and still feel that he is being “used” by a failing politician who happens to be his commander in chief.

    Of course it’s possible, but that’s not what’s happening.

    Have you not read the transcript to whch you link?  Have not read/seen the statements from Sen Reed and Speaker Pelosi about what they would or would not do or accept from what the General had to say? 

    Last time I looked, making up one’s mind without evidence, and especially before evidence is presented, is called prejudice.

    Consider that a “label” if you wish, it’ll make it easy for you to dismiss it, but keep in mind, that it’s not only an expression of social bigotry in the common usage, its a component of the law as well.

    Please note that I have not called anyone any names and in fact have refered to people whose conduct I find excrable by their appropriate titles and thus with respect.  Somehting you have pointedly failed to do youself.

  87. RTO Trainer says:

    IT wouldn’t be the first time that haas happened, and not just with this president (sic).

    Perhaps you’d be good enough to point to a parallel or two?

  88. GIL says:

    Way to go Murtha!!!

    You most be doing somethig right to have all the “Patriots of the key boards” looking for some valium.

    The “supporters” of the troops, that “support” them by sending them back again, and again, and again while they sit in their fat asses and pretend they are even Americans, think they have the right to attack a war hero that actually served his country.

    The bunch of coward-Cheney-Like “patriots” in this and other blogs are the worst kind of low life on planet hearth. 

    By the way “patriots”, America is still waiting for your “victory” …. So far we have seen a lot of hot air, and a river of saliva…. As the years go by your credibility is now worst than a car salesman in a junk yard. You morons should be honored we even talk to you.

  89. LOL, and another one flunks Protein Wisdom 101.

  90. GIL, you really are a moron.  Quite a number of us commenting here have served our country; more than a few as “heroic” as Murtha, at least one to my personal knowledge (although he’s never referenced it here) is quite a bit more heavily decorated than Murtha; and some here have been on the sharp end of the stick recently in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    Your juvenile behavior in repeating the chickenhawk theme however tells us much of you.

  91. B Moe says:

    What color is the sky on planet hearth?

  92. neitherleftnorright says:

    RTO trainer:

    Your graciousness is appreciated but not entirely representative of the tone on this site(or, for that matter, blogs in general). My “name-calling” seems milder than “fuckstick,” “moron” etc in the posts above. In fact I was pretty much just using the terms appied to me to refer to the writer who directed them at me..childish I know but pretty restrained considering.

    As to a general who has been “used” by a commander in chief, how about Colin Powell? Sure he was in the cabinet rather than the military at the time but don’t you think he felt a conflict between his instincts as a soldier and his loyalty to his commander in chief when pressured to build the case for invasion of Iraq? He has been nobly silent since then but how many ex-military have spoken out on just this topic? I’m new to this blog so I’m sure I’ve missed a lot of “discussion” (I won’t say name-calling) about this issue, but it seems to me there are plenty of voices from the military who might agree with Murtha’s disagreement with Bush.

  93. RTO Trainer says:

    The “supporters” of the troops, that “support” them by sending them back again, and again, and again while they sit in their fat asses and pretend they are even Americans, think they have the right to attack a war hero that actually served his country.

    Several of us here are troops, going back again and again, willingly.

    Care to revise and extend in that light?

  94. RTO Trainer says:

    neitherleftnorright,

    So, your’e willing to turn the blind eye to the Democrats similar use, amplifying selected mesages from selected retried generals and then ignoring them later when those messages no longer support the nearrative?

    As for GEN Powell (another man who has a title–SEC would also be appropriate and you can choose to do so), as you note, he has been largely silent.  I dont’ know what he thinks and, my point here, neither do you.  For my part, I’ll accept what he has to say at whatever point he says it.

    FWIW, “Murtha” is a Congressman (or a COL if you like) and should be referred to that way.

    FFWIW, I’m in the military now, demobilizing from Afghanistan.  I know that the people I know and have contact with aren’t a representative sample, but I’ll note that anyone here who agrees with REP Murtha is in the minority, and the few people I know who don’t agree with the war or President Bush (yet serve voluntarilly anyway) are voluably embarassed and angry with the PA congressman.

  95. ThePolishNizel says:

    neitherleftnorright…prove it. 

    Also, love your OTHER example.  Got any more?

    BTW, when were YOU called any names?

  96. gil says:

    Answer to RTO Trainer and Robin roberts.

    Since this blog opens up on Murtha and a bunch of you insut him freely, then I believe all you people in this blog ex-military or not are fair game in the orgy of insults you created.

    Or what is it with you, you can dish it but you can’t take it? Some “military” you are.

    Murtha’s credentials as a war hero did not stop your low life crowd to attack him in the most vile ways, and you get offended if people react in kind!!!!!

    This is a Democracy and you are in the minority so get used to a LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE MURTHA. Hey, after all the majority of Americans that do not agree with you, are the ones paying for your idiotic mistakes with their money and with their blood.

    OH and By the way RTO, the soldiers that keep on getting deployed back again, and again, and again HAD ENOUGH….Is simple human nature, so please stop inventing stories to fit your B.S. USE OF THE TROOPS, that’s what you people do…. Or do you “support” troops by sending them back to get killed? Is that what goes on in the twilight zone where you guys live? Now I know why your side has a 28% approval rating… You know the kind of approval rating that tells you guys is time to start re-acquiring those skills you used to have in wilderness living. After November 2008 the skills will come handy indeed.

    By the way you really want to support the troops? Start screaming for a draft, and start telling Bush that the present troops have done their part. And plese stop pretending that soldiers want to be re-deployed again, and again… DO NOT INSULT MY INTELLIGENCE.

    You know why you “tough” guys don’t confront the Moron in Chief instead of attaking Murtha, a war hero that has more than earned his right to say wherever the hell he wants to say? Because Republicans would CUT AND RUN from something that actually put their asses on the line. Reps will be Reps, full of talk and nothing else.

  97. RTO Trainer says:

    It’s a Republic.  As such it has other rules that prevent “tyrrany of the majority” from holding sway.  Things like a unitary Executive who is also Commander in Chief, terms of office, checks and ballances,….

    You clearly have no idea whom it is you are addressing.  I am a troop.  I’ve just returned to CONUS from Afghanistan.  Prior to this 15 month deployment, I was deployed for 12 months, also to Afghanistan on ‘03-’04.  In about 6 months I’m likely to be deployed to Iraq.  Since you can’t divine my stance from my circumstances, I’d recommend that you not apply as a registerd psychic, you don’t have the chops for it.

    You display a total ignorance of all things military in your cry for a draft.  It’s simply not possible to implement.  It would cost more.  We don’t have equipment to suppor the larger team squad and platoon sizes that a draft would require.  “kinder gentler” basic training would have to come to a screeching halt and allow drill sergeants to use “wall to wall counselling” once again.  Current, cohesive untis would be broken up to put seasoned NCOs and Mid level officers into units filled out with conscripts, degrading performance.  Kiss pay raises and Soldier benefits, a direct product of attracting volunteers, good bye and say hello to higher desertion, substance abuse and PTSD rates.  And flush all the money spent thus far on transformation, since all units will have to be compeltely redesigned to handle the changes caused by simply having to have more NCOs for fewer junior enlisted men.

    In addition you can watch Soldiers like me, experienced, trained and competent NCOs, walk away when our enlistments are up, as being unwilling to participate in the corruption and disintegration of the service–corruption and disintegration caused, not by the presence of conscripts, but by the unwillingness or inability of the government to make all the changes (Such as basic training) that the move would require.

    Get an education and learn who you’re dealing with before spewing again, would you?

Comments are closed.