Does the MoveOn Advertisement really need the full attention of the House?

Question

I mean, where were all of these admonishing declarations when Bush's crew was doing its thing?

--- Take Karl Rove for example ---
He stole letterhead from the democrats and published fake campaign ads on it that adverised free beer and rock music concerts to voters...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove

Or how about the infamous "Swiftboat Veterans For Truth", an organization led by Lt. General John Conaway, a vice-chair in the Veterans for Bush Cheney, has the sole purpose of discrediting John Kerry's 3 purple hearts, silver heart and bronze heart from his heroism serving in Viet Nam:

http://www.billingsgazette.com/newdex.php?display=rednews/2004/09/01/build/state/25-swift-boat.inc

Why do these ILLEGAL items of forgery and slander not get any attention from the House?

All MoveOn did was suggest that General Betray Us is not being honest about the situation in Iraq because he is a Bushie... which we already knew to be the truth.

Answer 1

well, it kills 3 birds with one stone. it helps to chill Freedom of Speech, tosses GW's 29 Percenters a moralizing bone to gnaw and it diverts some attention from the bungling of the war on Iraq and all those many GOP scandals.

and dontcha know that it's okay for neoCONs and their sycophants to smear the reputations of veterans like Kerry, McCain and Murtha but heaven erupts with indignation if a Liberal org has the temerity to question the integrity of one of GW's water carriers.

Answer 2

Don't forget what the Nazi trash did to Max Cleland sp? and what Bush did to McCain... The house should be focusing on why Bush was allowed to use a military man as a political shield to cover his sorry butt. The move on ad was mis focused and should have been on Bush, but Petrayeus did Betrayus because he should have refused to act as Bush's dog and pony show.. He brought disrespect to himself.

The house and senate should bring cots and shut down Congress till we get the troops out of there, not going along with the Flag Waving fools that get our troops killed, not support them..

Answer 3

it particularly is purely absurd. i urge all loose-loving human beings to touch their representatives and remind them of the 1st modification and warn them to get to artwork! Who cares what the advert stated, what it replaced into approximately or how plenty they paid for it. in actual fact that we are entitled to loose speech and if the government thinks they are able to condemn a team for loose speech, this united states of america is tumbling right into a deep and darkish hollow. What makes it much extra disgusting is the present state of the international. There are innumerable problems dealing with the rustic and the international. 1000's of harmless human beings die a week in Iraq, infantrymen and civilians alike and that they have the nerve to waste our time and funds vote casting in this nonsense. they are fairly pushing it. they are able to deny mandatory relax for the troops and now they have not have been given any concern attacking loose speech. Why not condemn the bush administration for sneaking us into this conflict or for warrant much less wiretaps?? Our representatives do not deserve the salaries they are paid nor the huge pensions they acquire. Why can we would desire to continuously pay for this rubbish government?

Answer 4

The fake outrage of the right and the corporate media has become the staple of American politics.

What's really sad is the absolute cowardice of the Democratic Party.Every time the GOP farts,they fall over in terror.For years they have let the right run roughshod,letting them lie and spread smears and fear.

This latest BS,22 democrats siding with the Republicans to pass a resolution condemning fellow Democrats for telling the truth is utter garbage,

I did not vote for these idiots to cower in the corner.

Answer 5

In the fall of 1970, Rove used a false identity to enter the campaign office of Democrat Alan J. Dixon, who was running for Illinois State Treasurer, and stole 1000 sheets of paper with campaign letterhead. Rove then printed fake campaign rally fliers promising "free beer, free food, girls and a good time for nothing", and distributed them at rock concerts and homeless shelters, with the effect of disrupting Dixon's rally (Dixon eventually won the election). Rove's role would not become publicly known until August 1973. Rove told the Dallas Morning News in 1999, "It was a youthful prank at the age of 19 and I regret it."[7]

Swiftboat Veterans for proof came out only after John Kerry made claims that the vast majority of them disagreed with. How dare they come out and disagree with his recollection of events? That makes them infamous and illegal? I missed that trial. Or are you simply saying they are "guilty until proved innocent?"

That's what MoveOn did. They slandered the general (as you are in the same unethical way) simply because he is under President Bush, as our military chief. You have no proof he lied. You simply treat him as guilty until proved innocent because you don't like what he says.

That's unethical.
MoveOn has proven it's lack of patriotism with this seditious slander.

You've joined them.

Answer 6

The fact that the government is denouncing moveon is completely ludicrous. Lets not forget how the Bush campaign tore McCain apart in 2000. What a bunch of hypocrites.

Answer 7

It is completely idiotic and the senate and/or house have no business denouncing the way any person or group uses freedom of the press.

Answer 8

MorOns.org deserves the same attention by the House as any of Americas enemies should get.

Answer 9

If Petraus is a Bushie, how did he get voted in to go to Iraq by a 97-0 vote in the Senate??????

Answer 10

Your examples point out why it is necessary. Your first example demonstrates why wikipedia is so unreliable that it should be banned as a reference in any school research papers; it is an entirely unproven assertion. In the second you have failed to point out how this purely political attack group has lied.

So your "why" question is simply answered by pointing out that there is no evidence of wrongdoing.

MoreOn, however, does need to be exposed for what it is. A blatantly corrupt organization perhaps eventually needing prosecution under RICO.