Based on their actions, that assumption seems accurate.
Apparently they can't bite the hand that feeds them. Sad that they don't realize it's the American people they are truly accountable to, not the Moveon.org crowd.
2007-09-21 03:14:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Leah 6
·
8⤊
4⤋
Well, I suppose you could assume that... could I also assume that the Republican candidates who did not speak out against the recent 'pro-war' TV ads are puppets of the right-wing Freedom's Watch?
A paraplegic vet says "they attacked us on 9/11". Yet even Gen. Petraeus stated that he's not aware of that connection. When asked by Sen. Byrd if there was any connection between 9/11 and Iraq, Petraeus replied, "Not that I am aware of, Senator."
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/12/1410237
Back to Freedom's Watch...
"Ari Fleischer, President Bush’s former press secretary, is now a spokesman for the Freedom's Watch, a new group of prominent conservatives behind the $15 million ad campaign . Mr. Fleischer said the central message of Freedom’s Watch is that “the war in Iraq can be won and Congress must not surrender.” Fleischer couldn't even remember the soldier's name when asked on Hardball.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/08/23/ari-fleischers-propaganda-iraq-war-ad/
Apparently Freedom's Watch had enough 'lead time' on the content of Petraeus' report to create the ads and get them on the air beginning Aug.22... just in time to 'remind' members of Congress returning from vacation. MSNBC and CNBC refused to run the ads; FOX and CNN had no such qualms about taking some of that $15 million.
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/08/018302.php
The Patraeus Ad (MoveOn.org)...
-- Closely examine the numbers. For example, US sources say 165 died in Baghdad; Iraqi Int. Ministry says 428 (from morgue and hospital records). A significant reduction in violence is possible when one does not count sectarian violence or car bombings. Using the entry point of a bullet to the head (back vs. front) to determine if a body is included in the death toll... is that 'cooking the books' or just 'war math'?
--- GAO Report (non-partisan):
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d071195.pdf
--- Testimony, recent reports not always on same page
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2007/09/11/testimony_recent_reports_not_always_on_same_page/
--- Another side of the civil war in Anbar:
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/11/1424208
-- Skelton condemned the ad the first day of testimony, but did nothing to lessen the controversy and doubt surrounding the Patraeus report. Instead, he had former CIA analyst Ray McGovern arrested after McGovern shouted out a request that Petraeus and Crocker be sworn in before testifying. The testimonies of Petraeus and Crocker were NOT under oath. Why not?
-- Bush drew parallels to Vietnam, let's draw another one: General Westmoreland testified before Congress in 1967, to report on the status of the Vietnam War, and he did so under oath:
http://www.consortiumnews.com/2007/091007a.html
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/09/11/1423249
Instead of assuming, I think we should be can taking a critical look at the information available and trying to determine truth vs lies, facts vs emotions and maybe make some sense what lies (no pun intended) beneath the surface of these issues. As the campaigns heat up, we're going to be getting much more 'sound byte' politics and will need to be much more critical too.
2007-09-21 10:45:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by sagacious_ness 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Perhaps it is because they had nothing to do with it! The Republicans went ballistic over it. Funny how they do not react the same about all the nasty little digs and play on words that O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh! Why do the Republicans not show outrage over their names?
Then again, why do you not post questions asking why the Republicans are not outraged over it? Why are they not outraged over O'Reilley calling Dan Rather a "Puppet"
http://mediamatters.org/items/200701090002
Why did they not apologize for this statement by Rush?
http://mediamatters.org/items/200708270001
What about this one calling for the murder of someone? Shouldn't the Republicans at least be outraged over that?
http://www.propeller.com/viewstory/2006/06/30/right-wing-talk-show-host-calls-for-murder-of-ny-times-editor/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fgreg-sargent%2Fright-wing-talk-show-host_b_24125.html&frame=true
There are far more examples that the Republicans should be outraged over than statements the Democrats should be outraged over!
2007-09-21 10:36:03
·
answer #3
·
answered by B. D Mac 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
For the same reason that Republicans weren't outraged at the Swift Boat scumbag ads that undermined and questioned John Kerry's patriotism and military service to his country. Those ads were very effective and probably the reason why we got stuck with this right-wing puppet for another four years. If Swift Boat can play hard, so can Moveon,org. Fvck you...you right-wing cry-babies!!!
2007-09-21 10:29:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Fern O 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
How important is MoveOn? Obviously they have the right's attention. If they weren't a power to be reconed with people wouldn't be screaming about the ad. I wonder why the Republicans aren't screaming and condeming Guilini's counter ad. MoveOn made a statement. It was countered what more do we need? Good grief is this all the right has to talk about? What about REAL issues for once. What is the right's plan for health care reform? Don't get sick? How about lobbying reform, or votor fraud reform? Do they want to talk about such things or continue to whine and call names or make personal attacks on candidates? I did not approve of the MoveOn ad and I wrote to them expressing my disapproval. What more can one do? They have free speech and press as do you and I. Since I did something about it by contacting MoveOn and expressing my disapproval what have you done? Complain on YA and nothing else? What good does that do but get people upset in your bait and gotcha game. If you really give a damn about the MoveOn ad get a message to them now or stop complaining.
2007-09-21 10:21:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Because Petraus is Bush's puppet...I'm sure he'll get a nice $$ lucrative job when he retires on the boards of the war industry cartel...when will you face reality and stop confusing patriotism with being used by an evil empire to finance their billionaire holdings...look up "war is a raquet" written by a GENERAL! or try Carlyle group..."The money masters" see who's profiting off this fake futile war effort, dont be so childish and naive...its men and the billions to be made in war profits...the USA is a cash cow of Disney world fools that are blinded by catchy slogans... $$$$$$$$$$$ talks son! Grow up, your leaders are corrupt $$ grabbing trash a virtual La cosa nostra MOB!
2007-09-21 10:17:45
·
answer #6
·
answered by generationZ 4
·
2⤊
2⤋
Because it's overblown. MoveOn had the right to publish that ad, whether you like it's content or not. SwiftBoaters had the right to smear Kerry's good name into the ground, whether we liked it or not.
The thing is though - MoveOn.org actually backs up it's statements with facts from independent studies (including the GOA) that run counter to what Petreaus testified.
Maybe you should look at the facts of the case before jumping to knee jerk conclusions like the rest of your party.
2007-09-21 10:16:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋
None is required. Moveon.org has the same rights to spew venom as the John Birch Society or any other group out there.
So move on already...
2007-09-21 10:17:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by KERMIT M 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
There is no mistaking the influence of MoveOn.org, with its 3.2 million members and powerful fund-raising apparatus, within the Democratic Party
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/15/washington/15moveon.html?n=Top/Reference/Times%20Topics/People/L/Luo,%20Michael&_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1190384187-OD3gIDIrUFb9QP5YPv1CNQ
2007-09-21 10:17:10
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Haven't you heard? The New York Times is now claiming that it ran that ad as a "political contribution" at a HUGE discount to moveon.org and will not give the same deal to people like Rudy Giuliani, who wants to run a counter-ad. At last count, five lawsuits have already been filed against the New York Times over that ad. If the case is tried Federally, we may actually see the New York Times get smacked down and smacked down hard.
2007-09-21 10:16:00
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
5⤋
UH, hello, thats not their job to grade websites.
YOU are the puppet of "right" wing groups, I see.
2007-09-21 10:32:40
·
answer #11
·
answered by Jim W 3
·
3⤊
1⤋