Who else is deeply, deeply offended by the Patreous "Betray us" ad?

Question

I havent had a good night sleep since the ad was printed, sadly.

Answer 1

Not me, I believe in the First Amendment and Freedom of Speech. I was more offended by the amount of embellishment by Petraus.
Try some Ambian CR.

Answer 2

you have have been given to be friggin' kidding! For years Republicans and their mouthpieces interior the media have used further and extra outrageous rhetoric on Democrats. Any Ann Coulter column has extra insulting stuff than 'time-honored Betray Us'. Rush Limbaugh says worse issues every day! it particularly is purely yet another occasion of neo-con double everyday. There are an entire checklist of 'crimes' that are basically incorrect whilst Democrats do them. have been you outraged whilst Republican senators stated Al Gore claimed to have 'invented' the information superhighway? have been you outraged on the fast Boat Liars smears against John Kerry? Or the outrageously irresponsible costs that invoice Clinton devoted homicide, treason, drug-dealing and rape--costs repeated repeatedly long whilst they have been discredited? Why do you without warning get outraged whilst somebody on the left does what the final has finished so properly and expertly for as a result long?

Answer 3

Why were you offended? It was not aimed at you, and not necessarily even at General Patreous. It was a political ad against the Bush administration. And it was nothing but a statement of various facts. Cant be denied, any of them - because they were all taken from direct quotes and printed facts. Doesnt mean that General Patreous is not doing an outstanding job in his position. The ad itself is saying "stop lying to the American public" to the Bush administration. That's it.

Answer 4

I am never deeply offended when someone uses their right to free speech. Rudy Giuliani countered their ad with an equally offesnsive one. Rudy's ad only offensive that is to those who choose to be so offended. Both MoveOn and Giuliani were using their right to free press and free speech. Those who hate the Constitution and what it stands for are the ones most upset by the ad and keep harping on it incessently. Most of us have expressed our distaste for the ad and moved on (pardon the pun). I wrote to MoveOn and told them that I disapproved of the ad. I align with the Democrats on most issues and am opposed to the war. It is obvious that General Petraeus (correct spelling) is a tool of the Bush Administration who managed to edit the report before it was delivered to Congress. I expressed my concern that MoveOn should not attack the messenger but the message even with Petreaus' earlier expression of a desire to run for president in the future and statements he made before about the war that proved to be false. Now it is time to stop the whining and carrying on and start thinking about issues that are of REAL importance to the nation.

Answer 5

I’m not in the least bit offended. Petraeus (note proper spelling) is a tool of the Bush administration and Moveon.org had the guts to call him on it.

The Bush administration is getting all upset about the ad because they have nothing of note to say about Iraq and are grateful that they can focus on this distraction.

Answer 6

Only those who don't believe in the First Amendment are offended. In America, we have the right to speak our minds and if it offends a few people, too bad. That's the price we pay to live in a democratic society. Or at least that's the way it used to be. What has happened to our civil liberties?

Answer 7

So if you were upset about that ad how did you react to how Petraeus's superior, Admiral William Fallon, chief of the Central Command (CENTCOM), derided Petraeus as a sycophant during their first meeting in Baghdad last March?
Fallon told Petraeus that he considered him to be "an *ss-kissing little chickensh*t" and added, "I hate people like that", the sources say.

Answer 8

Actually, I feel that way about the Freedom's Watch TV spots, but I haven't lost sleep over it. It's a sad state of affairs when the President of the United States, who twice swore an oath to defend and protect the US Constitution, uses his First Amendment right of free speech to condemn free speech... but only for those with whom he, and Senate Republicans, disagree. Ironically, independent reports (GAO) and news sources back up the MoveOn.org ad with facts. Yet General Patraeus' own testimony disputes the Freedom's Watch 'pro-war' TV ads. For example:

'Pro-war' TV Ads (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
-- "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)...
-- Petraeus Ad, this link in turn links to the sources used as basis for ad text:
http://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.html
-- 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

Answer 9

Get over it. The 'war" in Iraq is pointless and ****** up
Over 3000 people have died there and for what? there hasnt been any progress over there since this thing started. 6 YEARS!!!! thats a freakin long time to be in a 'war' and not have at least one slight result [except for the execution of Saddam Hussein]. **** the war and **** the Bush Administration, they can all burn in hell

Answer 10

Go to sleep. Generals of his caliber have big shoulders and dont pay much attention to this type of idiotic press. Remember when Gen Douglas McArthur was fired by Truman, America thought Truman was the idiot, and still loved General Doug nonetheless. They gave him a ticker parade in New York and he got his last laugh at Harry when he made his hero speech in front of Congress "Old Soldiers dont die, they just fade away" Remember he was a member of the "Long Grey Line" just like other great generals, Patton, Ike, Swartskoff, Marshall, like the ones who have gone before him they are men of substance and are not like politicians that get offened by comments in the press.