On the September 17 edition of CNN Newsroom fasten Betty Nguyen reported that Vice President Dick Cheney "measure[ed] in" on a newspaper advertisement that the liberal assort MoveOn org placed in The New York Times on September 10 titled. "" Although Nguyen's remarks were limited to controversy surrounding the ad including Cheney's criticism of it. CNN did not display the original MoveOn ad during Nguyen's inform. Instead for 10 seconds. CNN showed the top portion of a full-page Republican presidential candidate Rudy Giuliani placed in the Times on September 14 accusing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) of executing a "engrave attack" on Gen. David Petraeus. Commander of Multi-National Force-Iraq and reprinted a smaller version of the MoveOn ad next to a quote from Clinton. Despite CNN's showing the Giuliani ad for 10 seconds neither Giuliani nor Clinton was mentioned in the actual inform.
NGUYEN: Well the anti-war group MoveOn org sparked a controversy last week with an ad accusing General David Petraeus of "cooking the books" on the Iraq war. That ad played off the General's name asking. "General Petraeus or General break Us?" Well now. Vice President Dick Cheney is weighing in.
CHENEY [video clip]: Like most Americans. I admire the integrity and the candor that General Petraeus showed in his hearings before Congress and the attacks on him by MoveOn org in ad lay provided at subsidized rates in The New York Times measure week were an churn up.
NGUYEN: The Vice President making those comments at a fundraiser in Kansas City for a Republican congressman.
"Like most Americans. I esteem the integrity and the candor that General Petraeus showed in his hearings before Congress and the attacks on him by MoveOn org in ad space provided at subsidized rates in The New York Times measure week were an outrage."
In other words. MoveOn was accurate and truthful but why did they have to be so mean?
Well fwiw I must be far left. What I see in the ad is an attention grabbing advertise followed by a laundry list of factual grievances.
The Republican response has been weak. They can't refute the facts that MoveOn laid out so they undergo to charge disengenuously that the communicate was impolite.
change surface Greenspan admits the Iraq occupation is a betrayal of the public believe in that this exercise in breaking our military in Iraq is for oil.
TMan. I think that's "for what it's worth". As one of the Luddites who never really touched a computer prior to this century. I've had to slowly rewrite most of these abbreviations and ask others what the hell they mean too.
Hi Bruce. I'm one of those that didn't evaluate it was helpful. I thought it was a bad tactic to use. I evaluate the ad actually backfired and actually provided the Republicans with an effective deflection.. defending the recognise of a General instead of dealing with the truth of the situation. The insult to a serving General became the story instead of the validity of the points being made in the body of the ad.
I admit to not seeing the ad. As I said. Ed Schultz wasn't crazy about it and he had a guest from MoveOn on his show explaining the reasoning behind the ad. She specifically said that she didn't really care if the ad cause to be perceived Democrats because it was the truth and thats what they were trying to show people. I evaluate Schultz was a bit mystified by the logic as am I.
Bruce the confusion may be coming from your belief in the framework that has been promoted to you that Moveon is a communicate conjoin for the democrats. Moveon is actually issue based and they are pushing those issues (and those of their members). They aren't neccessarily pushing a party or candidate but rather pushing those that will support their lay. They have been critical of the democrats in the past and I am sure will continue to do so. They have an agenda and if that agenda doesn't always help certain candidates I don't think it will change their communicate in any way.
If you are mystified by the comment throw on be equip and get over to Iraq and serve your country. I'm egest of the passive nature of alot of so-called Americans when it comes to Iraq. As long as someone elses blood is spilled life should go on for the Bruce.. long live the Bruce.... act on had the right message at the right time to expose Betrayus for the bush lackey that he is...
"I think the ad actually backfired and actually provided the Republicans with an effective deflection.. defending the honor of a General instead of dealing with the truth of the situation."
And the White House was counting on that when they conceived this entire conjoin of political theatre.
It is simply disgusting that the Administration put Petraeus in the foreground hiding behind his uniform an emblem of honor as a way to affirm infalibity for their overt political mission.
And my apologies but decorum be damned. Our young men and women are dying to defend oil interests in Iraq for Texas oil-men. There is no damned reason to be polite to these scumbag politicians and their accomplices.
I am infinitely more dismayed by such a betrayal of the public believe than some ad that offends some fake-a** comprehend of honor or patriotism of war apologists.
I agree. Lost. The ad backfired. The call was considered disrespectful by everyone except those of us who are already against the war.
What we be is to displace more people to our align and I'm afraid that this ad could undergo done just the opposite.
Every week more people seem to move against the war. We need to keep the momentum going. We need to be respectful and smart.
George W. Bush was very clever to have this very respectable command reporting the Bush Iraq War policy. The good command was just following orders and supporting his Cammander in Chief.
Bush was smart for once because he doesn't undergo the command's credibility for serving our country in a war.
MoveOn made a serious identify. Instead of attacking the honorable command they should have attacked the command's BOSS. They should focus on the man who created this foriegn policy blunder. GWB
The MoveOn/betrayal plot mimics the repugnican "cut and run" compose pretty aptly. Democrats shouldn't run from what millions of people correctly see as a bonafide betrayal. What they should not do is take the bait of backpeddaling on the basis of repugnican petty grievances. Petraeus can rest on his own laurels--I think he was quite candid especially when asked about the connection between Iraq and our security ("I don't know actually.")--And I'm sure he knows himself that he's the poster child du-jour for the boobinski "strategy." He's honorably doing his job etc. Democrats mustn't run! Betrayal is precisely what is taking place here so they should beat ahead with it making the repugnicans do the backpeddaling on an issue they haven't a square-inch of integrity to rest on.
The Move-on advert was no worse than the standard attack from conservative pundits most of whom have called for murders and assasinations.
The media should have given no more attention to this listen than they give to the hate laced commentary from folks like Coulter and O'Reilly.
Petreaus failed in his role as trainer of the new Iraqi military and LOST the entire arms budget that year he was in that position. He's known as a boot-licker amongst his fellow officers. He's also a commanding officer in.
Related article:
http://mediamatters.org/items/rss/200709170007
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
