Home > Uncategorized > Everything In Moderation, And More’s The Pity

Everything In Moderation, And More’s The Pity

Post on September 14, 2007 by 13 Comments »

 What is up with Democrats these days?  First Nancy Pelosi takes impeachment off the table.  Categorically.  Just, no, we will not impeach the biggest scoundrels to serve as pres and veep since I-don't-know-when.  I mean, I heard John Dean tell Diane Rehm (hey, that rhymes) just the other day that they almost certainly deserve to be impeached, but we can't even think about it 'cause it's off the freakin' table.  Okay.

Now Elizabeth Edwards, truly a saving grace of this phantasmagorically long campaign season, tells us that MoveOn went too far calling Gen. Petraeus Gen. Betray Us.  (Insert squeaky sound of me cartoonishly cleaning my ear.)  What's that, Elizabeth?  No speaky moderate.  This is so not the time to worry about niceties.  Soldiers are dying.  Civilians are dying.  Hell, sheiks are dying!   Why worry about calling an alleged "ass-kissing little chickens@#*!" a betrayer?  Honestly, how is that too harsh?  The man holds lives in his hands.  One hand, actually, because the other is holding the phone while he makes his daily call to Bush.  This is absurd.  Edwards said she objected to MoveOn's ad because of her great respect for those who serve in the military.  I grew up a Navy brat too, and I have a lot of respect for people in the military.  Like all the soldiers who won't be coming home because Petraeus sold them out.

By the way, did you know Petraeus is planning to run for the presidency himself?  Oh, yes, my friends, it's on.  He'll be running against John Edwards sometime down the road, because I'm afraid 2008 won't be the year for either one of them.  But that's another day.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Comments (Closed):13

  1. Jim Stegall
    September 14, 2007 at 9:10 pm

    When you calm down Andrea, you may want to reflect on the fact that the United States has never elected to the office of president a general who had lost a war. As great a debacle as you people seem to believe that Iraq has been for us, you would have to admit that if General Petraeus manages to fix it he would probably deserve the job.

  2. sturner
    September 14, 2007 at 9:36 pm

    We agree, Andrea…If Petraeus is going to insert himself into the political process of selling this war with a one hour exclusive power point presentation for FOX viewers…well, then he is fair game for criticism. I’m sure he was just shoring up the base for his presidential run.

    Besides, Petraeus is no John Kerry. If you want to see how a soldier testifies to the Senate when he cares more about his fellow soldiers than he does his career…don’t watch Petraeus’ testimony. Rather, go here:

    http://verbal.democracynow.org/2004/2/20/john_kerry_then_hear_kerrys_historic

    Kerry’s testimony resonates just as much today as it did in 1971 when he asked “How do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?”

    Never forget that the people whining about the Petraeus ad are the same ones who cheered when Kerry was Swift-Boated.

  3. Jim Stegall
    September 14, 2007 at 9:58 pm

    Uh, Kerry told a few whoppers in that testimony, most of which reflected very badly and unfairly on his “fellow soldiers” (he was actually a Navy guy, but I know what you meant). And I don’t think you’re gullible enough to really believe that he didn’t give that testimony without his own political career in mind.

  4. James
    September 15, 2007 at 8:51 am

    Does anyone seriously think this was anything but theatre? The “Petraeus report” was written, rewritten and rewritten again by the White House so Bush could have the bizarre experience of somberly accepting his own recommendations!

    Most generals with integrity have long since left the employ of the Decider.

    As great a debacle as you people seem to believe that Iraq has been for us, you would have to admit that if General Petraeus manages to fix it he would probably deserve the job.

    Jim, am I to understand that you support running the meter to the tune of $10 billion a month for, say, the next ten years, with actions that by any objective measure are worsening the situation on every front?

    Petraeus is nothing not a sold-out whore. The idea that he could manage to fix anything is ludicrous. Neither he, you, nor I will live long enough to see Iraq “fixed.”

  5. James
    September 15, 2007 at 8:52 am

    Petraeus is nothing not a sold-out whore = Petraeus is nothing BUT a sold-out whore.

  6. Jim Stegall
    September 15, 2007 at 11:17 pm

    James: What amazing insight you seem to have into the inner workings of the Bush administration. How could someone with such solid leftist credentials as yourself have infiltrated the White House to such a depth that he would feel confident in stating categorically exactly how the report in question was prepared? I’m sure it’s an amazing story, and as soon as you tell us all how you did it I’ll take what you have to say about the report seriously. Until then I must dismiss you as the partisan fruit cake the above post makes you out to be.

  7. sturner
    September 16, 2007 at 9:33 am

    Jim…I’ll defer to James on whether he wants to reveal his “sources,” although I read about it in the Los Angeles Times (who cited Bush administration officials).

    Jim, now is the time for you to defend your statement and tell us why Iraq is not a debacle. Take as much space as you need. This should be fun.

  8. James
    September 16, 2007 at 12:04 pm

    One of the many sources on the background of the so-called “report” is indeed the LA Times.

    Despite Bush’s repeated statements that the report will reflect evaluations by Petraeus and Ryan Crocker, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, administration officials said it would actually be written by the White House, with inputs from officials throughout the government.

    Of course, that’s the liberal media for you.

    Jim, do you really think that Petraeus and Crocker came before Congress and said anything not thoroughly vetted and approved by the White House?

    Please reply with either “yes” or “no.” Because if the answer is “yes,” you will save me the time and trouble of any future engagement.

    PS Petraeus did say one thing that wasn’t scripted, that he most certainly regrets having done.

  9. Jim Stegall
    September 16, 2007 at 9:02 pm

    James: Yes.

    I’ll take General Petraeus’ word over the LA Times’ allegation of what an anonymous administration official said any time.

    sturner: A debacle is what we would have if we were to follow the advice of the Democrat leadership and run away from the struggle over Iraq’s future. We face a very difficult challenge in Iraq; whether it becomes a debacle is dependent upon how we handle it. The adults among us understand that.

  10. James
    September 16, 2007 at 11:32 pm

    Thanks.

  11. sturner
    September 17, 2007 at 6:42 am

    Jim…you conveniently ignore answering the question about whether Iraq has ALREADY been a debacle for America in regards to blood, treasure, our moral authority, our national security,etc. I believe it has already proven to be a debacle, you apparently disagree. I simply asked you to defend that statement.

    Nobody, including me, believes we don’t face a “difficult challenge,” so put that strawman away for another day.

  12. Jim Stegall
    September 17, 2007 at 6:18 pm

    I thought it was implicit in my previous answer that I don’t think that Iraq is a debacle in regards to blood, treasure, moral authority, national security, etc. Sorry if that wasn’t clear to you. I don’t think the statement needs defending, as events on the ground far outweigh anything you or I can say about it. I see on television and read about in the paper the same violence and bloodshed that you do, and it doesn’t look like a debacle to me–it looks like an ancient society stuggling painfully (but with American support) to turn itself into something better. Of course, all wars look like debacles to those who don’t understand what they are about or don’t believe the ends are worth the struggles, but I know you are un-persuadable on that, as am I.

    In the long run it doesn’t matter what you call it; if we can leave behind a reasonably stable, reasonably democratic government that acts more like an ally than an adversary vis-a-vis our interests in the region, no one will admit that they ever thought it was a debacle.

  13. Jim Stegall
    September 24, 2007 at 9:43 pm

    Poor Andrea. Seems like everyone is backing away now from the Patraeus ad. First the major Democrat candidates tried to look the other way; then they had to admit that it was wrong. Then Democrats in Congress folded like a cheap chaise lounge and voted to condemn it. Now the NY Times itself is allowing as how it made a mistake in accepting the ad.

    Getting kind of lonely down there in the fever swamp, isn’t it Andrea?