Comments on: MoveOn's Media Misstep

[memekiller]

Anyone have Lexis/Nexis? I''d like to compare the use of "blowback" when discussing Democratic strategy vs. Republican. I wonder how many people fretted about Coulter or SBVs hurting the GOP with centrists vs. hand wringing over MoveOn.

[mattcat25]

Operation
Iraqis
Liberation

OIL!

The Oil Production is all we should be talking about at this point and going forward with the United States involvement in Iraq. George WMD Bush is an Oilman, and should speak in Oil nomenclature to the American People. How much Oil is being produced and the future potential production, and how long, or how much are proceeds going to re-pay the American People for our costs in Liberating the Iraqis people from Saddam Hussein (an evil dictator).

All this other reporting from Military Generals and Whitehouse Cabinet Memebers such as Colin Powelle, David Betraeuse, Condoleeza Rice, and *** Cheney is insignificant to the eventual conclusion to the Oil situation and budding windfall to a controlling body.

Cost of the war today: $451,143,285,810

Is there going to be a pot of gold at the end of the Rainbow for the American People?

[k-sozer]

The moveon ad is much more shocking and offensive than you seem to realize. What is more, ordinary centrist voters recognize that fact.

This might well be the Joe McCarthy moment for the left. Moveon has demonstrated conclusively that it has no decency.

[mattcat25]

Iraq doesn''t need the United States, the Iraqi People given that they%u2019re Kurds, Sunnis, or Shiites are Iraqis first. The Iraqi People have Oil. Iraq is floating on a sea of Oil estimated at 400 billion barrels. If the United States presents were to disappear completely today "the Iraqi People" would still have Oil.

Oil revenues would bring investment, employment, and prosperity to Iraq. No matter who is running the Iraqi government, or if the country is divided, Oil will still bring the necessary commerce to the People of Iraq no matter what form of regime they settle on to rebuild their war torn country.

I believe the Maliki Government is misleading the Bush Administration into believing that they are willing to give the majority (70%) of the Oil revenues to Private Multinational Corporations. As long as the Bush Administration is supporting Nuri al- Maliki''s Government with $money and military force they will take it without accountability.

It would appear very doubtful the Maliki Government would be able to hold control over all of Iraq without US support. And, if the US should suddenly pull their operations (like WTC Building 7) the Bush installed puppet government in Iraq is destine to collapse and a power vacuum will take place for control of the Oil Production and the guaranteed revenues, investments, and prosperity.

Iraq doesn''t need the US, they have Oil.

[shingles1]

Maybe Broder will chime in with his one thousandth column about the left''s shocking lack of civility and how this is the beginning of a Bush bounce.

[shingles1]

Tempest in a teapot - the teapot being Inside the Beltway. The rest of America doesn''t see the big deal. As you note, we expected Patraeus to give us a rosy progress report whatever the actual conditions on the ground were. So pointing out the fact that Patraeus isn''t exactly a straight shooter, after all he works FOR the Dissembler-in-Chief, is kind of like stating the obvious here.

By the ways, asking the guy in charge of making the surge work to make an unbiased assessment of the surge is like going back to get a "second opinion" from the same doctor that gave you your "first opinion" in the first place. Pointless. The only people who can''t see the fundamental logical problem with this are the overpaid and lazy "journalists" who melt at the flash of shiny medals.

Anyways, you can also make the case that by turning this ad into a media story, you''ve ended up inadvertantly spreading it''s message far and wide. Everybody now knows that not everyone thinks Petraeus is the Second Coming - a little shine is off of the new media golden boy.

So..a misstep?

Only among whiney liberals who''s default position is the defensive crouch.

[memekiller]

Nancy Pelosi, following in the footsteps of John Kerry in 2004. Back then, Kerry told MoveOn to remove a factual ad about Bush''s National Guard service, even though MoveOn is unaffiliated with the Democratic Party. Of course, the media gave him credit for taking the high road, and the press suddenly put the heat on Bush to denounce the Swiftboaters, and his refusal to do so became a character issue that derailed his campaign.

HA! HA! HA! HA! HA!

I''m sory... let me catch my breath here. No, what actually happened is when Kerry called on MoveOn to remove the ad about an actual question about Bush''s service, it allowed the press to single-mindedly focus on the non-question about Kerry''s record! You know what''s even funnier? The entire time, the press was very careful not to suggest the SBV nonsense the GOP flacks handed to them had any connection to Bush''s campaign!

Pelosi''s learning curve is as nonexistant as the rest of DC.

[memekiller]

Yes, and Michael J. Fox sure stepped in it when he got the shakes, and what a fool Edwards was for not rolling over and dying when she got diagnosed with cancer rather than moving on with her life. What a horrible miscalculation her husband made by advocating policy that helps poor people when he has money. Foolish! And what was Hillary thinking bringing her boobs out in public?

Of course Republicans were going to manufacture a diversion, the same way they can shut down empathy for Fox simply because he has a horrible disease, or Edwards because she''s dying, or because Hillary has female anatomy. If they didn''t have this ad, it would have been something else, and the Democrats would have "handed" them an issue that diverted attention away because they know they have you there to run with it.

Why is this dominating the news? Don''t blame MoveOn. Look in a mirror.

I can''t imagine a Republican saying something so partisan and extreme that the press would ever consider suggesting it might "blowback". They call for assassinations of Democrats, mock triple amputees, savage veterans, manufacture accusations of rape, drug running and murder, or twist McCain''s adoption of a girl into an illegitimate black child. You''ll never see a post about that. You''ll never hear that called a stumble.

[one_american]

MoveOn.org has successfully made a laughingstock of the Democrats.

And just when you thought the Democrats couldn''t look any more foolish, weak, anti-American, or treasonous - they jump the shark - again.

[skeezix06]

I didn''t see the ad till now. And now I''m sort of wondering what the fuss is all about.

Excuse me, but hasn''t the media been telling us for at least a week or two something along the line that the report was going to be written by the White House and then given to Petraeus for approval?

Iraq''s Congress has come back for their rather expensive (for us anyway) month long vacation so I suppose that could be considered "stepping forward".

Why wouldn''t the Pentagon adopt a bizarre formula for counting casualties? Last I heard the White House had adopted cost of living indicators that didn''t include the majority of "luxuries" such as a roof over our heads and food.

The move-on.org ad is wrong about one thing though. I have seen either a story about ethnic cleansing somewhere on tv; probably PBS. That''s where I go quite a bit now. They''re a little more honest... And excuse me, but I listen to Up To The Minute while I''m trying to wake up and don''t really care what''s being said, but didn''t I hear just this morning how we "might" have a withdrawal next summmer if we''re really lucky and the Iraqis step up to the plate from our "temporary" surge that was originally only supposed to last how long?

Pelosi? She''s rapidly making herself irrelevant.

Why don''t you just cut to the chase and tell us how low you think our IQs are.