September 10, 2007
Republican Talking-Point Posts (Brent Budowsky)
I noticed that more than one of our Republican Pundits wrote virtually the exact same post, using the exact same words, which also used the exact same words used by Neil Cavuto and others on Fox News, which also used the exact same words as more than one Republican during the Petraeus hearings today.
The story line of the day — that the Democrats are controlled by MoveOn.org — was dutifully put out this morning by the party, then dutifully repeated by the pundits, Fox News, and some on the House committee. Nice work if you can get it.
In the interest of saving time, why don't our Republicans Pundits take the morning talking points from the party, sign them jointly, and write one post with all their names (and with, of course, a little disclosure)?
It is not as exciting as original work, but it would be time-efficient, and it'd conserve space on the Blog. Plus, properly done, it would add both comic relief and a blow for disclosure.
Of course, I deplore the MoveOn.org ad today, but only a Republican pundit, or the hired help on Fox News, could even say with a straight face that it has anything to do with Democrats.
In the meantime, our Republican friends will find very interesting my upcoming prediction on the Senate elections.
32 Comments
»
The Hill welcomes comment from anyone and will almost always post it whether it is favorable or critical, as long as it is substantive and advances debate.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Love ya, Brent, but I haven't watched or seen Fox News all day. In fact, I don't know about what magic talking point machine in the sky you're talking about, but none exists.
Could it be, pray tell, that John and I take umbrage with the nonsenes put out by Moveon because we actually read the newspaper? More than many of our friends on the left are capable of, original thought, but I understand that from them.
You're a spirited commentator and I admire your thinking, but this time, you're barking up the wrong tree!!
Comment by Ron Christie — September 10, 2007 @ 5:22 pm
Oh, the Democrats are fully capable of treason on their own:
John F. Kerry: The War in Vietnam and the War in Iraq are now converging in too many tragic respects. OpEd, 5/6/2006, Kerry’s Senate Website
Hillary Clinton: Mr. President, no war since Vietnam has stirred the emotion to the extent of our people as this one. I hear it all the time as I travel from one end of New York to the other. On the floor of the U.S. Senate, Remarks at HER Senate Website, June 21, 2006
John Edwards: This is deja vu all over again. We saw it in Vietnam and we saw it earlier this year. We don’t need any more non-binding resolutions or big statements; we need to end the war. From his campaign site.
Jimmy Carter: The war has been unnecessary. And now I think we’ve reached a point in Iraq that it’s become a quagmire – very similar to what we experienced in Vietnam. The Today Show, September 30, 2004 Source
Ted Kennedy: “In Vietnam, the White House grew increasingly obsessed with victory, and increasingly divorced from the will of the people and any rational policy. The Department of Defense kept assuring us that each new escalation in Vietnam would be the last. Instead, each one led only to the next. There was no military solution to that war,” Kennedy said. “Echoes of that disaster are all around us today. Iraq is George Bush’s Vietnam.” ABC News, January 9, 2007
Comment by Igor R. — September 10, 2007 @ 5:22 pm
How is the message of the Democrats today different from the Japanese WWII psychological warfare against the United States? Only the name of the president is different.
These three points were broadcast over and over to the American soldiers by several English speaking Japanese women:
1 Your President (Franklin D Roosevelt) is lying to you.
2 This war is illegal.
3 You cannot win the war.
Comment by Igor R. — September 10, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
Brent, who is affiliated with the Moveon.Org American hating organization? Why, it's the Democrats of course. So how can you whine when people connect the dots? When I hear people complain when people note the truth, I have to wonder why they don't want the public to hear the truth.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — September 10, 2007 @ 5:44 pm
Brent today:
"Of course, I deplore the MoveOn.org ad…"
Brent on Aug. 31st:
"Beyond taking a political position in a way that an active-duty general should never do, which demonstrates political tendencies that in truth trouble many of the highest ranking military officers today, his forecast and analysis turned out to be almost completely, catastrophically wrong on every level.
We now learn the “Petraeus Report” was never the Petraeus Report; it was to be a report he drafted, to be rewritten and released with the language, forecasts and recommendations not of Petraeus, but the White House that has a long history of misrepresentation on matters regarding Iraq.
Even worse, we now learn that there will be no written report from Petraeus or the White House that was to have received his original paper. The whole exercise was a political sham, designed to buy time, and now that the time has been bought, the truth comes out: The Petraeus Report will not exist, anywhere, in written form."
General Petraeus today:
"At the outset, I would like to note that this is my testimony. Although I have briefed my assessment and recommendations to my chain of command, I wrote this testimony myself. It has not been cleared by, nor shared with, anyone in the Pentagon, the White House, or Congress."
Matzie of MoveOn.org on preparation for Petraeus's report in NYT Magazine Profile in "late August":
“Most of what we have to do will be done before he lands in Washington. We have to frame his statements before he makes them. He’s not Saint Petraeus — he’s General Petraeus.”
MoveOn.org ad today:
“General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House.”
Any questions?
Comment by Igor R. — September 10, 2007 @ 5:47 pm
Brent: It is a great point you're making here but we forget it too quickly; all in a party or organization do not speak for every individual. Moveon does not speak for all democrats (My cousin is Senior Staff for Rep Lowey NY and she is no Moveon fan) and many others of my large democratic family members. FOX or the Christian Coalition do not speak for all republicans on every issue. It is a fundemental problem with party politics in general. Unfortunately we don't build coalitions around important issues, instead we try to force all platform issues down every member's throat. Impractical and innefficient.
The other issue is the paid media is lazy and even worse thinks it has to keep up with the "lightspeed" media like this blog to stay relevant. So "original work" that takes time is trying to compete with "you" and "me". Not an easy task and a task they should leave to us. We still need in depth reporting but they have not figured out how to compete yet. Am I making sense?
Comment by Rich — September 10, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
And why would you deplore the Moveon.org ad? What's to disagree with? Petraeus has agreed to be Bush's yes-man where others have declined. So why should we feel sorry for Petraeus? He's now complicit in the deaths of additional US personnel and Iraqi civilians. Personally I feel sorry for the US troops - who are commanded by a general who's willing to lie in order to further his career - as well as the Iraqis who will suffer more death and destruction. It's a shame when someone says the truth and the media runs away from it. It's actually okay to criticize the military from time to time. It doesn't make you unpatriotic or a traitor Brent. Grow a pair.
Comment by Paul — September 10, 2007 @ 6:07 pm
Who cares what you think or predict Brent — you're just a liberal talking head towing the Democratic line.
Comment by John Simmons — September 10, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
Ron, I respect you too, but you gotta admit,
it's funny, and all the Republican posts
do look the same today, and Cavuto should
know better. Honestly, it's laughable, that
Democratic leaders, who have not exactly done
profiles in courage opposing the war, follow
moveon.
I'll answer Paul and some of the Republicans
at the same time, with the same answer.
Paul, I dont need to grow a pair of anything,
the moveon ad was a cheap shot, it lowered the
debate, it added zero to the discussion and
did no good for those of us trying to change
the policy. It was stupid, silly, and low and
I will never bless that kind of politics from
anyone, on either side.
The issue Paul, and to some of my conservative
friends, is that Petraeus does NOT speak for
the view of his boss, Admiral Fallon, or the
Joint Chiefs, or General Jones, or the majority
of commanders throughout the Army and the
Marine Corps. That is the argument against
the escalation, not name calling Petraeus
which demeans our discussion in the same ways
we accuse, correctly, many on the right of
doing.
I was one of the first people in Washington
to be critical of Petraues and I did it
publicly, privately, sometimes at a high
level with Democrats and more than one
Republican. But I did it based on his military
strategy, on the fact he has a very bad record
in previous Iraq assignments, which I wrote
and spoke about very specifically, in detail,
with facts. I opposed what Petraeus has been
doing very strongly, very early.
I hope moveon continues to maintain public
support for a policy change and respect them
when they do. But "Petraeus or Betray Us" is
a garbage slogan that demeans the debate; its
wasted money better used in other ways; and
as strongly as I oppose the policy, and have
since 2002 unlike most Democrats here, when
groups I sometimes support do things I do not
agree with, I say it, as I am here.
There is ample reason based on sound military
judgment to oppose the Petraeus strategy and
that is how I frame the debate because it is
the right argument and the smart politics.
Comment by Brent Budowsky — September 10, 2007 @ 8:31 pm
Actually leaning towards disapproving of the ad, I saw Eli Paritser on Countdown, this evening. He makes the point that Move On did another controversial ad when Colin Powell went before the UN with the George Bush/Dick Cheney death plan. The poor but stupid General had to show cartoons to try to get the gag on the rest of tghe world. At that time, Move on was derided from the same warmongers that are leading the charge on this one. That ad was also unpatriotic. would it have been that the original ad had some impact, and our country were saved from the deadly debacle.
Comment by Chris Calbi — September 10, 2007 @ 11:16 pm
Most of the comments read like a brownshirt festival, which only goes to prove the point of the article.
Comment by Michael — September 10, 2007 @ 11:43 pm
Can you say "robots"? Can you say "desperate"? How about "deranged"?
It seems to me, Brent, you blew the cover of shills like Ron Christie, and Armstrong. Though I must confess to knowing this for the last , 25 years. Witness some of the nutball posts above by a few token neocon nutballs (Igor, RR, Rich, ilk, etc).
Who would rely on Fix Noise for news? Neocons, that's who. Now look at the mess they've made.
Brent, you've gotten the neocon nutballs all worked up, again. And I know why. The enocons have no traction, zero.
Can't you tell by the number of responses from the nutballs that the neocons love Brent?
Comment by Lester — September 11, 2007 @ 12:12 am
I love how Republicans call Democrats traitors without mentioning the consequences of being a traitor. Last time I checked the penalty for treason in a time of war is summary execution. I haven't heard one gutless coward Republican bring that up. I guess you are either being disingenuous in your portrayal of Democrats as traitors or you are just gutless cowards like I said. I would guess it is the latter since, if you Republicans weren't all gutless cowards you would be walking point in Tikrit right now supporting these supposed beliefs of yours instead of writing your meaningless little "traitor" screeds in the comments of blogs. But, then again, of course you are here because you are all gutless cowards. BTW, spare me your excuses for not being there supporting your supposed beliefs, I am sure you have "other priorities" just like your VP. Gutless Cowards.
Chris
Comment by Chris — September 11, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Several years ago I was listening to Bill O'Reilly's radio show while a substitute was hosting. He was a LOCAL Conservative Talk Radio host from Philadelphia. The guy was so angry at one of the Republican Talking Points that had been e-mailed to him that morning that he admitted that this was going on so that he could vent his outrage. My point is that this guy's show was local, not syndicated like the Big Guys, yet he was included in the Talking Points distribution as well. Only he was too stupid to know that officially the Talking Points don't exist! I couldn't help thinking that this cretin was a prime candidate for a pair of "cement galoshes," as crime figures used to say.
Comment by Montag — September 11, 2007 @ 12:28 am
“Of course, I deplore the MoveOn.org ad…”
Lies, damned lies, and statistics. When will you deplore the lying general? How many more GIs lives must be destroyed to polish the Frat Boy's fragile ego?
Comment by Mike5000 — September 11, 2007 @ 12:57 am
Brent,
Don't back down to these treasonous losers. You've already shown very clearly, through his own words, that David Petraeus is a Bush poodle. He's obviously betraying his oath to the Constitution and the trust that the American people have in a soldier of his rank, so let's call a spade a spade! Betrayer!
Petraeus kissed up to Bush in 2004, as you proved with his own words, and he lied about how we was training Iraqi battalions.
Peter Principle: In a hierarchy every employee tends to rise to his level of incompetence
Petraeus Principle: In the US Army some generals rise to levels beyond their levels of incompetence
General David Petreaus was in charge of the training of Iraqi army battalions from Jun 2004 to Sep 2005
Sep 2004–Petreaus: “Six battalions of the Iraqi regular army and the Iraqi Intervention Force are now conducting operations. . .Within the next 60 days, six more regular army and six additional Intervention Force battalions will become operational. . . Nine more regular army battalions will complete training in January”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49283- 2004Sep25.html
Sep 2005–Gen. George W. Casey Jr., who oversees U.S. forces in Iraq, said there are fewer Iraqi battalions at “Level 1″ readiness than there were a few months ago. . . The number of Iraqi army battalions that can fight insurgents without U.S. and coalition help has dropped from three to one, top U.S. generals told Congress yesterday.
http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2005/tr20050930- secdef4002.html
Feb 2007-General David Petraeus was named commander of multinational military forces in Iraq.
Comment by Don Bacon — September 11, 2007 @ 1:24 am
Even Michael O'Hanlon, Petraeus's long-time friend, has to distance himself from this one:
"Some of Petraeus’s critics will argue, as they already have, that he wrote an oped in the fall of 2004 that was too optimistic about the training of Iraqi Security Forces then — and too closely timed to the American elections that November. To them, that suggests he was and is acting as an agent of White House spin. That oped may in retrospect have been somewhat too optimistic. . . ."
And, yes, Michael, Petraeus IS an agent of White House spin.
Comment by Don Bacon — September 11, 2007 @ 1:52 am
Paul how exactly do you know that "Petraeus has agreed to be Bush’s yes-man where others have declined"? In the past he disagreements with Rumsfeld possibly led to him being "exiled" to Fort Leavenworth.
A general commanding and army, wnating to win, is naturally ALWAYS responsible for the deaths of his own soldiers and the enemy. It's only to ultra-liberals like you that such decisions are difficult to understand.
You slander a good man for no reason. But that's what liberals do to those who don't believe in their version of reality.
Comment by Igor R. — September 11, 2007 @ 2:01 am
We know he is a yes man, Igor, because he is violating his own military teachings in order to support this civil war. He is the new Westmoreland.
Fox News and Brit Hume make me sick. Hume asks no tough questions of Betrayus or that sickly looking ambassador. Hume is a waste of time. He is a facilitator of talking points and nothing more.
Comment by Gary Anderson — September 11, 2007 @ 11:29 am
Brent: Stating that Moveon.Org continues to "maintain public support" is a misleading statement. They don't have much public support except within the left wing of the Democratic party. Maybe it was just an oversight, but in their case it's simply a public display.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — September 11, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
Igor R., I fought in DS I, my father fought in Viet Nam and my grandfather fought in Korea & WWII. All 3 of us feel you are a thoughtless, mindless supporter of a conflict that is a cover for OIL THEFT. My grandfather, father and I would be glad to stop by your house and give you a few history lessons on WWII in the Pacific, the Korean War or the Viet Nam War…you choose.
Comment by Joseph Conrad — September 11, 2007 @ 2:50 pm
Joseph, appreciate you and your family's service, but I must kindly decline your offer because I don't seek face-to-face contact with anyone. Plus you must agree that having three people with weapons training who really don't like my views stop by my house may not be the most prudent course of action.
I'm so sorry that my attempts at explaining what I'm saying, writing poetry and parodies, looking for quotes to post, and various other non-robotic activities left you with an impression that I'm thoughtless and mindless. As I'm more focused on the Islamic aspect of the conflict as opposed to the oil aspect perhaps I'm overlooking the obvious. Best wishes to you in your search for truth!
Comment by Igor R. — September 11, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
I feel better going after Ron Christie on Brent's post. Ron, I'm sorry to be so harsh with you in yours, but you are really part of a lunatic fringe, as well as the top authoritarian of the new 21st Century. Your imaginary taxi ride and other adventures in Boston were simply ludicrous.
Comment by Chris Calbi — September 11, 2007 @ 7:47 pm
Igor cites John Kerry in his constant usage of "traitor."
Bizarrely, he conflates WWII and Japanese propaganda as equal to legitimate debate in the USA.
His hatred of the USA and his fellow Americans comes shining through in all his name-calling.
He's just another smarmy fascist.
Go back to your toilet stall Igor. You're much more comfortable there than with decent Americans.
Comment by fascismisdead — September 11, 2007 @ 8:31 pm
I see the usual contingency of neocons (Igor, RR, and Simmons) kooks disagree with you Brent. So, something must be right.
Comment by Lester — September 12, 2007 @ 12:35 am
Joseph Conrad, you're service in the military, while commendable and honorable, does not make you an authority on the war on terror. I love all these armchair generals, whether they were in the military or not, who believe themselves to be experts. They are not.
Comment by Robert Rosencrans — September 12, 2007 @ 8:26 am
dead fascist, your lack of original thinking is amazing! And I think something smells about your persistent interest in toilets.
Comment by Igor R. — September 12, 2007 @ 2:16 pm
RR;
You commenting on Joseph's post is very funny. I commend your service but you wouldn't know about the war on terror. Please, a person who has worn the uniform of the US knows a lot about terror. How to inflict it and how to counteract it. It is beyond obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about.
Comment by Mike Coleman — September 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Igor has the same credentials as Bunny Pants (Bush). Chickenhawk.
Comment by Lester — September 13, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Lester, you have the same deep thinking patterns as Barney the Purple Dinosaur and about as much appeal to adults.
Comment by Igor R. — September 14, 2007 @ 2:45 pm
[...] Scott Beale wrote an interesting post today!.Here's a quick excerptI noticed that more than one of our Republican Pundits wrote virtually the exact same post, using the exact same words, which also used the exact same words used by Neil Cavuto and others on Fox News, which also used the exact same … [...]
Pingback by NBAVids - Basketball Rocks » Republican Talking-Point Posts — September 30, 2007 @ 7:36 am
As a Conservative Republican the top domestic issue I want solved is illegal immigration.Rudy Giuliani has the best plan to solve illegal immigration and I'm very happy to have Him as a candidate of our Republican Party.Look, John McCain is not right for the Republican Party because he does'nt share the true values of Conservatives.John McCain still supports illegal immigration because he said he would give an illegal person married to a U.S. soldier amnesty.He oposed the Bush tax cuts,he supports gay marriage and was even choosen to be a vice President for a Democrat.He is somewhat like a Democrat who supports the war but he might not support big government programs so the best description of him is to call him a Independent.If you will spread the word John McCain does not share the values of us Conservative Republicans.
Comment by Terrance Morgan — January 17, 2008 @ 10:14 pm