Gay Patriot Header Image

Iraq IS Vietnam — To Democrats and the News Media

Jack Kelly writes a spot-on piece at RealClearPolitics about the Leftist propaganda war in Vietnam and now in Iraq. (Read the whole thing!!) (h/t – PajamasMedia)

The one great similarity between Vietnam and Iraq is that our enemies, despairing of victory on the battlefield, sought to win with a propaganda campaign. In Vietnam, this strategy succeeded. If it fails in Iraq, it will be chiefly because of the emergence of the new media.

The Tet Offensive proved catastrophic to our plans,” said Truong Nhu Tang, minister of justice in the Viet Cong’s provisional government, in a 1982 interview. “Our losses were so immense we were unable to replace them with new recruits.”The news media reported this overwhelming American victory as a catastrophic defeat.
“Donning helmet, Mr. Cronkite declared the war lost,” recounted UPI’s Arnaud de Borchgrave. “It was this now famous television news piece that persuaded President Lyndon Johnson…not to run for re-election.”

Shaken by Tet, he planned to seek terms for a conditional surrender, the North Vietnamese commander, Gen. Vo Nguyen Giap, wrote in his memoirs. But our news media’s complete misrepresentation of what had actually happened “convinced him America’s resolve was weakening and complete victory was within Hanoi’s grasp,” Mr. de Borchgrave said.

Journalists are repeating in Iraq the errors (or worse) they made in Vietnam. Earlier this month, the Army sponsored a conference for retired general officers at Fort Carson, Colorado. They were addressed by recent returnees from Iraq, including Col. H.R. McMaster, commander of the 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment.

“All returnees agreed we are clearly winning the fight against the insurgents but are losing the public relations battle,” said a retired admiral in an email to friends.

The relentless drumbeat of negativity has had its effect on support for the war in Iraq. But it’s been nothing like the change in public opinion brought about by the massive media mendacity that followed Tet. That’s because in those days journalists could lie with impunity. This is no longer the case. 

It really makes you question — do American Liberals and their co-conspirators in the American news media want us to lose in Iraq?  And if we do, are they prepared to face the consequences of that loss by a resurgent al-Qaeda that will strike our allies and our nation?

Imagine if FDR had to fight World War Two with the entire American news media and the opposition party in Congress cheering against him and instead providing our secret war plans to the enemy (Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan).

That is precisely what is going on now in our War on Terror.  What I’d like to know is why no one in the Bush Administration has the guts to start charging folks at the New York Times and in certain Democrat Senate offices with treason and sedition?

It is time to take the gloves off and allow our troops to win the war and not allow the Democrats and the news media to lose the war deliberately….again.

**UPDATE** – Of all people, Andrew Sullivan agrees with my conclusion in this post!

But if we do pull out too soon, and Maliki is too weak to survive, we will have to deal with the Jihadist-riddled failed state that may emerge (and already has emerged in an embryonic form) in Iraq. Those forces will not decide to leave us alone because we have left. if anything, the reverse is true. They will claim victory and press the war further onto our shores and elsewhere. The one thing we have to keep in mind is that, however screwed up the Iraq policy has become, the enemy has not gone away. Withdrawal from Iraq would not mean that this existential struggle is over. It would mean that the enemy has been strengthened and ready to take the war against the West (and “heretical” Islam) to a more lethal stage.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Share

74 Comments

  1. “It really makes you question — do American Liberals and their co-conspirators in the American news media want us to lose in Iraq?”

    Well, yeah! At least the loudest, most frantic or ‘committed’ ones. Many others just “follow the headlines” and are misled, I think. But the loudest ones at DU, Kos, etc. are emotionally on the side of the terrorists whom they proudly announce are “insurgents”, Minutemen, etc.

    That’s why they try to malign any policy that might lead to our victory, and attack any information that shows our victory is indeed necessary and justified.

    It must make them feel powerful to do that. On the other hand, as you and Kelly point out, in the new world, they have increasingly less power to do it, as the good people use new media to talk back.

    You mentioned (rightly) FDR and WW2. Here’s another interesting difference.

    In WW2, there were insurgents (enemy non-uniformed taking potshots at uniformed Allied troops), and terrorists (enemy non-uniformed taking potshots at civilians). Do you know what the Allied troops did with them? Summary executions, in accord with martial law. It’s interesting, from several angles, that today we won’t countenance it. I think the Geneva Convention would permit it (as GC protections, by design, are mainly or only for fighters who willingly distinguish themselves from civilians).

    Comment by Calarato — June 24, 2006 @ 10:36 am - June 24, 2006

  2. I think they would claim that they don’t “want” us to lose. I think it’s just that in their minds there is no other possibility.

    War never solves anything. Violence always begets more violence. Optimism is anti-intellectual and uninteresting to boot.

    I’m about to embark on a day long “mommy-taxi” extravaganza and shouldn’t even be looking at this but it would be really interesting to do a search and find out when “quagmire” and “Vietnam” were first used to describe Iraq. I wouldn’t be even a little bit surprised to find out that the dire likelyhood was “reported” even before the invasion.

    Comment by Synova — June 24, 2006 @ 12:21 pm - June 24, 2006

  3. Ah, more anti-Americans propaganda from the American political right. The Republican Party controls all branches of the federal government. The Republican President has been running this war and has been free to run it without any serious opposition. So if the war is going wrong or if pr is a problem, then it is their fault.

    Comment by Edward TJ Brown — June 24, 2006 @ 1:44 pm - June 24, 2006

  4. Edward-

    Instead of slyly changing the subject, why don’t you confront the questions and facts posed here?

    Comment by GayPatriot — June 24, 2006 @ 2:17 pm - June 24, 2006

  5. Actually, I think Edward (in #3) is right.
    The lies of the media and the Left and their obvious investment in American defeat in this war should be further exposed by this Administration.

    That W has not ‘released the hounds’ on these people who are doing tremendous damage to our cause of liberation and the spread of Democracy shows his class and respect even for the enemy. Unfortunately, it’s costing us dearly.

    Similarly to handling the terrorists with kid-gloves, deferring to the MSM and the rest of the crackpot Left is a recipe for losing. Edward is right…if W and the White House were more serious about exposing the naked aggression of the American Left, the cockroaches would scatter and we could get on with winning this war instead of hand-wringing each setback.

    People should listen to Edward. Whether he believes it or not, he’s really hit on something.

    Comment by ColoradoPatriot — June 24, 2006 @ 2:28 pm - June 24, 2006

  6. I sometimes think Americans do not have the fortitude for all out war anymore.

    I think we would all be speaking Japanese or German if Roosevelt and Truman had to fight wars the way we fight them now, with the media against them and the opposition party rooting for, if not a loss, not an outright victory either.

    I do think the administration can do more to combat the enemy on our shores-I think the administration should go after fully anyone who leaks classified information to the media. Make the risk of doing so painful, and those who are leaking may think twice about doing so in the future.

    Comment by just me — June 24, 2006 @ 3:19 pm - June 24, 2006

  7. Well, now that the Iraqi government has called on the US to set a timetable to leave and also plans to provide amnesty for those who have attacked our troops, I say we oblige them by leaving.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13521628/site/newsweek/

    Of course, Bush has already said we’re staying through the end of his term with his More of the Same war plan. If he sticks to that, it sounds like we may have the whole country against us. Of course, if Bush decides now to put forth a timetable to leave, I guess that makes him both a flip-flopper AND a cut-and-runner. My oh my, neocon heads are about to explode!

    Comment by Ian S — June 24, 2006 @ 3:36 pm - June 24, 2006

  8. It really makes you question — do American Liberals and their co-conspirators in the American news media want us to lose in Iraq?

    Of course they do. Their blind hatred for Bush demands it. The American liberals would do whatever it takes to undermine Bush. It’s evident that they would go so far as to facilitate the destruction of this country to regain their birthright of power. They would do anything just so they can blame Bush and appear as heroes.

    The thing is, you can’t buy into the notion that the liberals give one solid damn for America, her soldiers or Iraq and her people. Casual observation proves that. Hell, just look at all the leaks. Do you really think liberals give a flying fuck about you, me or this country?
    Make no mistake, they’ll demand we bite the pillow just for their political gain.

    #7
    You didn’t bother reading the article, did you?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 25, 2006 @ 12:01 am - June 25, 2006

  9. The lefts biggest achievement was our defeat in Vietnam, they want a repeat of the victory.

    Comment by Pamela — June 25, 2006 @ 12:24 am - June 25, 2006

  10. You sound hopeful, Ian. Do you want the entire country to be against us? I understood it was the insurgents asking for this as part of potential negotiations, not the Iraqi government. I haven’t read too much on it so I may be wrong in that. Naturally, you link to MSNBC for your info.

    The fact that insurgents are wanting to negotiate should be good news. Reality for the Arab-style Afrikaaners is starting to sink in perhaps? If the Iraqis want to go all French/Democrat and kiss the asses of homicidals, I doubt there is much we can do. It was always a depressing gamble to deal with any Arab nation for a better world.

    Comment by VinceTN — June 25, 2006 @ 1:35 am - June 25, 2006

  11. Of course Ian likes to use the pejoritive wingnut. How original, right?

    Well, Ian, for mine own part, I’d much rather be a “wingnut” than a apologist WHORE for traitors.

    Oops! I forgot you prefer erudite conversation (i.e. big words, little meaning). How about HARLOT for traitors? Sound better?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 25, 2006 @ 7:17 am - June 25, 2006

  12. hahaha. Yeah like conservatives backed Clinton during kosovo. gimmee a break, they all but joined up with milosevic. despite that, Clinton still won. as Bush 1 had a succesful intervention in Kuwait despite liberal and libertarian moaning and substantial protests. If you can’t win with a free press, you can’t win. Besides, there are news agencies all over the world. Even if the US press marched in lockstep with the president, it wouldn’ matter. Michelle Malkin’s nationalism would be better exploited at Pravda or al jezeera.

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 8:59 am - June 25, 2006

  13. talk about “the enemy within”

    “You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo.”

    -Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99

    “Well, I just think it’s a bad idea. What’s going to happen is they’re going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years”

    -Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

    “I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarifiedrules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our overextended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today”

    -Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

    “I don’t know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag”

    -Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

    “Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?”

    -Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

    “Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”

    -Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

    “This is President Clinton’s war, and when he falls flat on his face, that’s his problem.”

    -Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 9:08 am - June 25, 2006

  14. The fundamental failure on the Left and Right in regard to the case that Iraq is another VietNam result in process is that, unlike VietNam, Iraq has one of the most legitimate govt’s in the Arab Middle East… elections, democratic institutions, consensual alliances, diverse political interests (some of which continue to be antagonist to each other).

    It seems to me that those on the Left like Ian S and lester –quick to build a VietNam analogy– fail on the first step out of the crib: pick the right lesson to learn from past failures and then LEARN.

    And lester… that collection of quotes looks familiar. Since when did you think it would be useful to rip and paste here

    from DailyKos
    http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/6/18/161016/461

    from Crooks & Liars
    http://www.crooksandliars.com/stories/2005/08/17/heresWhatRepublicansSaidAboutClintonAndKosovo.html

    or from Janeane Garofalo
    http://www.janeanegarofalo.us/display/ShowJournal?moduleId=160369&categoryId=18625

    What next? Interview segments from CNN? NYT? Maybe highlights of rants and ravings from Al Franken?

    You gotta be kidding, lester. Or is this a lesson learned from the Democratic Party’s lead plagiarist, Senator Joey Biden?

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 10:39 am - June 25, 2006

  15. matt – What do you think about what the quotes say?

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 10:40 am - June 25, 2006

  16. lester, answer the question: you present them as “original” to you… no tag line. Are you an inveterate liar or a sloppy plagiarist?

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 11:06 am - June 25, 2006

  17. we have already lost the war on terrorism. we have allowed this facade of an administration to butcher our constitution. we were lied into the iraq debacle with cherry-picked and false intelligence.

    this administration will forever be tied to this immoral war. the legacy is set. sorry, but there will be no airports, elementary schools or parks named for this charlatan. he’s responsible for a $2 billion a week war that is bleeding our treasury dry. he’s responsible for the 2500+ american soliders killed and 20,000 wounded. he’s a war criminal and should be punished for his crimes.

    Comment by rightiswrong — June 25, 2006 @ 11:27 am - June 25, 2006

  18. “10: “Do you want the entire country to be against us?”

    Of course not. As I said, if the iraqi government puts out this timetable and and amnesty, I think we should accept it and leave. But I bow to reality in which Bush may not want to leave and in that case, we WILL have most if not all the Iraqis aginst us. I think Bush would be a fool not to use this as the means of declaring victory and leaving. And that’s why there’s a good chance he’ll decide to stay.

    #11: “Ian likes to use the pejoritive [sic] wingnut.”

    Oh please. It’s merely a term of endearment. After all, that’s what the following terms, all used to refer to me in the last few days, are: “petulant little prick”, “moonbat”, “troll”, “BDS type”, “dick”, among others. Right?

    Comment by Ian S — June 25, 2006 @ 12:07 pm - June 25, 2006

  19. rightiswrong, tell us how you really feel.

    Sure there are similarities between Iraq and Vietnam, but there are plenty of differences too. In Nam, we were trying to prop up a Saddam-ish dictator and his government, in Iraq we took down a Saddam-ish dictator and his government. In Nam, the general public was smitten by the promise of Communism and hadn’t yet learned of the real consequences of the ideology, Iraqis already know first hand (fortunately and unfortunately) the true nature of the Islamo-fascists and are not likely to believe the empty promises of Al-Qaeda. One similarity; if we leave before the job is done, we pretty much guarantee the downfall of the Iraqi government to the enemy. I am continually astonished that two gentlemen who served in Vietnam, Kerry and Murtha, are so doggedly determined to have Iraq end the same way.

    Comment by sonicfrog — June 25, 2006 @ 12:18 pm - June 25, 2006

  20. matt- that’s insane. It’s obvious I cut and pasted them from the internet. do you think i sat and typed those out from memory? You’re dodging the question.

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 12:20 pm - June 25, 2006

  21. sonic frog- boston globe ideas section makes similar point in todays paper. We took vietnam from being divded to a tyranny. we took Iraq from being a tyranny to being divided. at http://www.boston.com

    Also, both al maliki and general casey have embraced the timetable for withdrawl. the insurgents are fighting us. when we leave the iraqis will drive them out.

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 12:35 pm - June 25, 2006

  22. “Well, I just think it’s a bad idea. What’s going to happen is they’re going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years”

    -Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

    LOL… Hahahaha… how long now have we had troops in that area?

    If Clinton was right to go into the Balkans…. oh, wait, he didn’t *go* into the Balkans because he *knew* that Americans would not agree to an intervention that meant troops on the ground getting shot at. So we just flew *over* the Balkans and shot at stuff. I guess it’s okay to kill people if it’s done from the safety of an Air Force jet.

    But Ooops! Sticking our toe in the water and pretending that we weren’t swimming really didn’t work. Pretty soon we had troops on the ground *anyway*… how the heck did that happen? Like frogs in a pot of water brought to boil, Americans that *would not* tolerate boots on the ground or American deaths were sending their sons and daughters to the Balkans.

    Clinton never really “sold” the idea that we needed to stop the genocide in Serbia to anyone, at least not that stopping it was important enough to go to war. Now maybe it really was a good and righteous cause… but if so, why didn’t most Americans agree? But most Americans would agree to a RISK FREE intervention… not important enough to spend American lives, but important enough to kill people. And the mission? Well, it *crept* baby, because you can’t really do anything but break stuff from up in the air.

    That the criticisms then sound similar to those now is really rather irrelevant… unless you’re trying to say that the criticisms now are just as unfounded or else, perhaps, that the conduct of this war is just as necessary and every bit as effective. What equivalence are you shooting for there, lester?

    BTW, if all you *want* to do is break stuff, air strikes are appropriate… it depends on what your goals are. The Air Force is very good at what it does, destroy military targets, transport stuff, destroy infastructure, shock and awe… but stop masacres among the population? How exactly is that supposed to work from up in the wild blue yonder?

    Comment by Synova — June 25, 2006 @ 12:46 pm - June 25, 2006

  23. synova- you can’t possibly compare the “occupation” of kosovo or any of the american military bases in, sat Germany or Korea with Iraq. that’s insane. There are casualties in Iraq every day. there have never been any in kosovo.

    Both interventions were wrong. and the point was about undermining the president during a war.

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 1:18 pm - June 25, 2006

  24. #22: “how long now have we had troops in that area?”

    Actually, things are pretty peaceful there now and the US is down to about 2000 deployed troops. BTW, are you aware that the vast majority of troops utilized in the Balkans was ALWAYS contributed by the Europeans themselves?

    Comment by Ian S — June 25, 2006 @ 1:37 pm - June 25, 2006

  25. lester, thanks for your non-answer.

    I score you as both an intellectually dishonest liar and a sloppy plagiarist –sorry, but I don’t debate losing rhetorical arguments ripped from DailyKos, DemocratUnderground, or Crooks&Liars. You may think that novel and insightful a ploy, lester… I see it as pathetic.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 1:37 pm - June 25, 2006

  26. matt- You are still avoiding the issue. what is your opinion on what delay and co said about the sitting president in war time. stop the funny business about the quotes.

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 1:53 pm - June 25, 2006

  27. Thanks, lester. You have my answer: you’re both an intellectual dishonest liar and a sloppy plagiarist. I don’t debate the day’s content at the DailyKos.

    Learn to read, lester. It’s fundamental.

    Learn to stop lying in another life.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 1:55 pm - June 25, 2006

  28. can someone please interprett what this mongoloid is trying to say? i’m plagerizing a bunch of sites I’ve never even read?

    Fine, I am a huge plagerist. Now, about tom delays undermining of the sitting president during war?

    Comment by lester — June 25, 2006 @ 2:21 pm - June 25, 2006

  29. #27: “you’re both an intellectual dishonest liar and a sloppy plagiarist”

    Maybe I’m missing something but how exactly is it plagiarism to use exact quotes and identify who specifically stated them? Now others may also have put up those exact same quotes but unless Lester actually used other persons’ commentary (about those quotations) without attribution, I don’t see any plagiarism involved.

    Comment by Ian S — June 25, 2006 @ 2:22 pm - June 25, 2006

  30. lester, thanks for the affirmation; you’re also intellectually dishonest but I don’t suspect that’s a concern for you.

    Self awareness is the first step off the Democrat Plantation and toward freedom, lester. BTW, I’ve already answered your question, to wit: “I don’t debate the day’s content at the DailyKos” and “Learn to read, lester. It’s fundamental”.

    So, let me go slow… I (meaning “me”) don’t (meaning do not) debate (meaning the nonsense you see as baiting or inciting) the day’s content (meaning the trash talk that substitutes for reasoning and opinion) at the DailyKos (a site that tends to attract the marginalized, victimized, disenfranchised radical Left seeking solace and support in a world that otherwise dismisses them).

    Recapping for lester: “I don’t debate the day’s content at the DailyKos. Learn to read, lester. It’s fundamental.”

    Now, lester –take a few minutes out of your day and try to comprehend those points.

    Really try, lester. Really. Don’t just walk past it; try.

    Then answer me this: do you think for even a split second I care about the opinions or issues that those whack-o Left activists of the fringed and frayed Democrat Party have to say? I don’t. If I did, I’d go to the DailyKos and debate the senseless and impotent Left. American left them behind many elections ago and no one has had the decency to inform them that they no longer matter.

    So lester, I’ve answered your question. Others here can debate you on those points –I won’t.

    Ian S, I understand how you couldn’t see taking a concept from another site, pasting it in here, stealing the intellectual propriety of the concept by not clearly indicating where it came from, and then trying to divert debate away from the thread –a thread which excellently underscores the how the Left’s MSM and many Democrats are trying to humiliate American troops and the mission in Iraq –and not see that as plagiarism. Moral character isn’t a strong suit for you.

    I know Ian S –you and some of political peers here would actually like to see Americans lose the WOT, withdraw from Iraq before Iraq is ready to completely fight the sectarian divisions… it’s why you guys made a big deal when the body count went to 1,000… then 2,000… it’s why TeddieK WALKS over to the Senate and celebrates moments of American shame –exploiting it for partisan gain. You guys want us to lose. You want tragedy played out on the evening news shows so that the clucking Left talking heads can recreate the dishonorable conduct and impact of guys like WallyCronkite and Dan-oops-Rather did during VietNam.

    I also know you can’t comprehend what plagiarism is because you’re morally challenged and deficient in judgement. It’s ok –we don’t expect radical Left Democrats to have morals in my part of the Midwest… we’ve got Senators StupidCow and LaughinLevin as Michigan reps in the Senate and we’ve long since given up on looking for moral conviction, leadership or character from those two Democrat Party leaders. It’s like trying to find an honorable man in Parliment.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 5:15 pm - June 25, 2006

  31. #23 We’re still there doing peacekeeping duties. This is hard to understand? BTW, “casualty” in case you (obviously) didn’t know, includes wounded.

    Comment by Synova — June 25, 2006 @ 5:44 pm - June 25, 2006

  32. ln #16 Michigan Matt writes in response to clealy identified quotes from other people:
    “Lester, answer the question: you present them as “original” to you… no tag line. Are you an inveterate liar or a sloppy plagiarist?

    And then in response to the sane reply that he was citing quotes from Rebublican regarding Kosovo, Michigan-Matt writes:

    lester, thanks for your non-answer.

    ” score you as both an intellectually dishonest liar and a sloppy plagiarist –sorry, but I don’t debate losing rhetorical arguments ripped from DailyKos”

    Stupidity of that level is almost an art form. Michigan-matt: do you even know what the word plagarism means? Can you explain how Lester committed plagiarismby using clearly identified and attributed quotations? I mean seriously can you COMPREHEND–(the phrase of choice by many around here when left with no rational argument)?

    And you are the folks going around calling people fucktards? Sometimes I suspect all the posters here live in some group home for developmentally disabled reactionaries.

    Comment by Brendan Flynn — June 25, 2006 @ 6:25 pm - June 25, 2006

  33. “Who’s more pathetic, Brendan: The contemptible reactionaries? Or the ’sane’ people like you (hah hah) who, while protesting that you have contempt for them, keep coming back to them again and again?”

    non-responsive to the substantive point, as typical. Anyhow. what is your problem with people who don’t agree with your politics to come here and say so? All you ever say is go away, go away, I don’t want to hear it. As for keep coming back, I don’t believe I have even looked at this site, never mind commenting, for over two weeks. I’ll admit every now and then I get a certain perverse pleasure out of reading the comments. C’mon, secretely even you and your friends must be shaking your head at Michigan-Matt’s accusation of plagiarism. It was rock dumb.

    Comment by Brendan Flynn — June 25, 2006 @ 7:04 pm - June 25, 2006

  34. “The contemptible reactionaries” By the way, I don’t dispute there can be very intelligent conservative thinkers or even reactionaries, but Michigan-Matt isn’t one of them.

    Comment by Brendan Flynn — June 25, 2006 @ 7:06 pm - June 25, 2006

  35. Brendan, thanks for your two cents worth and witty observations from the GayLeft’s Left flank. Sorry, but if you need lessons on plagiarism I suggest you consult with Senator Joe Biden or someone else from the Democrat Party –well equipped to take the time to provide you a lesson in the art of stealing ideas and using them without attribution –because in the Midwest, Brendan, that’s what defines plagiarism and plagiarists.

    Your quoted sequencing of comments, Brendan, is out of joint and context… perchance that’s where you err again? I wouldn’t expect that to bother or worry you since your game is to incite, ankle bite like a sand flea and taunt like a common school yard bully rather than discuss. The point, poor Brendan, wasn’t that lester created the quotes (what a schmuck) the point was he stole the idea of presenting the quotes as some kind of indictment of GOPers… good God, man, are YOU really that dense?

    I explained how lester accomplished the feat. You weren’t reading or comprehending… I even went real slooooooow for lester because I know he’s developed this habit of low comprehension.

    You weren’t, by chance, his reading teacher? Is that what provoked you? Someone ragging on a student’s brightest idea of the week?

    Or was it my indelicate reference to your dearly beloved DailyKos? I wonder, what provoked you so, Brendan… because its clear your baggage is packed pretty heavy. You might want to think about leaving the bags back at the Democrat Plantation next time… it’ll make your travel less wearisome for us.

    It’s ok Brendan –Ian S and lester are holding a spot for you on the Democrat Plantation’s front porch; nice and visible and all. Tell me about the view from the GayLeft’s Left flank and fringe? It’s gotta be lonely knowing that you’re not a part of the game, not a part of the solution, not even part of the debate anymore as state after state pass Defense of Marriage Acts and Iraq moves closer to settlement… and AlGore finally admits he lost the race, the election, his Party. Is that Hillary on a white steed coming to save you? LOL. I think not; she’ll lance your sorry political ass in a flash if it suits her short term partisan game.

    Finally Brendan you write, inaccurately as always, “And you are the folks going around calling people fucktards?”

    No Brendan, I haven’t used that term and you couldn’t find one instance of it if you try –you won’t, because of the character issue you fail on repeatedly… you just like to toss out wild-assed speculative taunts and then recede into those dark recesses of the Plantation’s porch until next provoked.

    And Brendan, you further write (inaccurately again): “It was rock dumb” as a characterization of my question to lester about sources, attribution, stealing ideas… bud, my Dad had a phrase that fits for you: “Even rocks in the pile can shine in the right weather.” You Brendan are out of your league.

    Spend some time reading and comprehending; it isn’t hard Brendan. You can do it. Maybe even teach Ian S and lester? Yeah, that’s the ticket.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 7:55 pm - June 25, 2006

  36. Well after reading your last rant/post, I am not surprised daddy told you “Even rocks in the pile can shine in the right weather”–I mean he had to think of something nice to say to you. It appears even your faher was aware of your cognitive deficits.

    “because in the Midwest, Brendan, that’s what defines plagiarism and plagiarists.” Now you are trying to tar the whole mid-west with your dumbness. Matt, as you might say I will go real slow here. ” “. Those are quote marks. They are used to set off other people’s words. When you tell the reader that the words between ” & ” were made by person A, that is called attribution. Here is an example:

    ” and AlGore finally admits he lost the race, the election, his Party. Is that Hillary on a white steed coming to save you? LOL. I think not; she’ll lance your sorry political ass in a flash if it suits her short term partisan game.” Michigan-Matt. (Not that there is much of a risk of someone stealing that one).

    You may disagree with Lester. You might say that others have used those quotes to make the same point. Fine, but it is not plagiarism. Comprehend? It really is not that difficult of a concept.

    Comment by Brendan Flynn — June 25, 2006 @ 8:26 pm - June 25, 2006

  37. Brendan, you really just don’t get it. The problem isn’t with the quoted references. Honest, I wasn’t kidding when I asked if you were that dense you missed the difference and what was in reference.

    Clearly, you are THAT dense.

    It’s ok… the porch still has another rocker for you Brendan. While you’re up there rocking impotently… try to meditate a bit on the rock pile phrase… you missed than one, too.

    Gheez, where does the GayLeft’s Left flank get these losers? No wonder they’re getting beat in state after state with DOMAs.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 8:32 pm - June 25, 2006

  38. And I resist the urge to do so but I think lester should ask for his money back from Brendan-as-Reading-Teacher. You may be the first instance of willfully negligent comprehension malpractice, Brendan. Wow.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 25, 2006 @ 8:35 pm - June 25, 2006

  39. COMMENT #3 IS EXACTLY CORRECT…

    WE MUST PROSECUTE TREASONISTS & SEDITIONISTS OR IT IS THE RIGHT’S FAULT.

    START WITH KOS & NY TIMES & JOHN KERRY, KENNEDY & DURBIN.

    Comment by Ed of Tampa — June 25, 2006 @ 9:56 pm - June 25, 2006

  40. Well, gentlemen & ladies, where appropriate, I just read the whole tiff after I made my last comment.

    I must score Michigan Matt 100, everyone else nothing.

    FYI, I am a Liberal Democrat so the scoring was fair and balanced.

    Comment by Ed of Tampa — June 25, 2006 @ 10:24 pm - June 25, 2006

  41. Because the Vietnam War was so terribly important. What are the Vietnamese doing now? Making our Nike sneakers. What would the Vietnamese be doing if America had won the war? Probabaly buying our Nike sneakers.

    BIG difference.

    Comment by Erik — June 26, 2006 @ 12:06 am - June 26, 2006

  42. Carlato, you’re a pig fucking asshole. That is not what I said. And no, I don’t care if you ban me from posting for saying that, Mr. Gaypatriot. If you are going to let people openly slander other posters in your comments section, you might as well just have no rules at all.

    SO CALARATO, YOU’RE A PIG FUCKING ASSHOLE BECAUSE THAT’S ALL YOU CAN GET. SHEEP, TOO.

    There, now how does slander feel?

    Comment by Erik — June 26, 2006 @ 12:17 am - June 26, 2006

  43. Let’s see.
    I know my memory can be fuzzy, but I sure as hell don’t remember Republican protest marches during Kosovo. I certainly don’t remember any showing how they support the troops by protesting at Walter Reed.

    I don’t recall anybody on the right fabricating the number of civilians killed and I sure as hell don’t recall anybody practicly orgasming whenever the U.S. body count rose.

    I’m not sure, but I think it’s probably a safe bet that none of the publications on the right leaked top secret national security information in the form of a front page book advertisement.

    I sure don’t recall any broads travelling the world on the Communist dime pretending they give a shit about their son who died in combat, sat in a ditch, humped Jesse Jackson or made out with that shitbag Chavez.

    I could go on, but you get the idea. It goes without saying that Lester and his worthless buddies are full of it, as usual.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 26, 2006 @ 12:17 am - June 26, 2006

  44. Right. Edit out the part where I said BIG BROTHER. That was the entire point of my statement.

    Look, you are a fucking thug. You try to intimidate people who don’t support your own strategic viewpoint. You call them unpatriotic, stupid, childish, anything that makes you feel superior. I am done with you. You are probabaly some ugly mother fucker who has no other life than to post on these comment boards, since you write more here than the people who run the damn blog in the first place!

    You’ve made this blog a very unpleasant place to visit and I shall visit it no more. You can go right on sitting behind your computer, calling people names. Just know, it’s good you can hide behind your computer. Because if you ever said the things you write on here to my face, i’d make you look like your insides had been turned out.

    And that’s the final word.

    Comment by Erik — June 26, 2006 @ 12:48 am - June 26, 2006

  45. Because if you ever said the things you write on here to my face, i’d make you look like your insides had been turned out.

    Talk about an empty threat.

    If you are apologizing and demanding that we kiss the butt of the homicidal maniacs that you call “freedom fighters” that have set out to kill Americans by any means possible, you expect us to believe that you would ever attack US?

    But then again, we’re not anti-Bush; you’ll put up with and tolerate anything as long as it’s anti-Bush.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 2:30 am - June 26, 2006

  46. #44
    I am done with you.

    Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Bruce & Dan hate ass prints on their door.

    Speaking for myself, I’ve been booted from leftist websites for less than that. Ask me to shed a fucking tear for you, douchebag.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 26, 2006 @ 7:22 am - June 26, 2006

  47. Hey Lester (the molester),

    The question you should be asking, that is if you are an honest person at all, is which of those on your quote list demanded we surrender?

    Which of them tried to use Congress to unconstitutionally take over control of the military?

    Whenever you’re ready, douchebag. If you ain’t got the guts to answer here, at least send me an e-mail.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 26, 2006 @ 7:26 am - June 26, 2006

  48. Ed of T-town: thanks. I agree.

    Erik: ouch, ouch, ouch. All this hostility, name calling, and anger –you getting ready for a trip to Boston? All directed toward Calarato the Gentle, Calarato the Level Headed? Calarato the sane? Calarato the Patriot… oh, there it is… the Patriot. That’s what burns your wick so fast; you can’t accept there actaully are patriots in America who will stand up for our country –and hold our troops accountable where appropriate, always hold our politicians and leaders accountable from either party and seek to support the troops AND the mission.

    Is it the Patriot part of it all that steams you? I know my liberal friends and their friends think punching at America or Bush is great fun… but they feel their conduct has no consequence. They’re think: “Hey we’re just little fry”. They’re marginalized. Their political interests will not gain power. So there’s nothing to lose in playing “sport” with America, her efforts, the troops, etc.

    But when they get to that point of comfort with unpatriotic sentiments, guess what happens Erik?

    They come to think of it as ok for the press to do it… for Jon Stewart to do it… for actors and their ilk to do it… for our enemies to do it.

    I try to remind my liberal friends, when they start down the dark alley of anti-American, disloyal, unpatriotic chatter that it is a dark alley for a reason… and the alley is filled with rats and vermin.

    Hazard your own peril, Erik… learn from my friends or you can continue your mean, spiteful, petty belittling indictments of American leaders and our war-time efforts abroad. But try to leave Calarato’s good name and the sheep alone.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 26, 2006 @ 7:33 am - June 26, 2006

  49. blind faith in bad leadership is not patriotism, michigan-matt. think for yourself for once.

    Comment by rightiswrong — June 26, 2006 @ 9:07 am - June 26, 2006

  50. Web Reconnaissance for 06/26/2006…

    A short recon of what?s out there that might draw your attention….

    Trackback by The Thunder Run — June 26, 2006 @ 9:49 am - June 26, 2006

  51. blind faith in bad leadership is not patriotism

    No, blind faith in bad leadership would be the Democratic Party under Dean, Pelosi, and Reid.

    Comment by V the K — June 26, 2006 @ 11:32 am - June 26, 2006

  52. Did Republicans and Conservatives Hate America?…

    Who said the following quote:
    “I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vag…

    Trackback by Blowhard — June 26, 2006 @ 11:56 am - June 26, 2006

  53. Last night I ran into trouble with the commenting software while talking with Erik, and it lost my comments. I don’t know if they can be restored. Until they are, I’ll try to add some context, in this comment.

    Erik had said, in “The Enemy Within” thread, that he “choose[s] terrorism” over what he thinks is happening politically in America today. That was the objective meaning or implication of his words. I pointed it out – and also how wrong I thought it was. I was tart, but no name-calling. (I have never called Erik any names.)

    As you can see, Erik’s response was to freak out and say I tried to slander him. In response, I pointed out that I didn’t slander him; he just didn’t want to accept, nor to correct, his own words’ meaning.

    Admin – This comment can be deleted, if my others are restored.

    Comment by Calarato — June 26, 2006 @ 12:08 pm - June 26, 2006

  54. thatgayconservative- thank you for actually making a point, even though I don’t think it was good. Republicans and democrats have different ways of protesting. I don’t think you’d see a republican anti-war protest. plus, kosovo was not any 3 and 1/2 years. But your point is taken: l\the left has gone beyond damaging rhetoric and has publicly displayed their displeasure with the president in various ways, which republicans didn’t.

    But I think the “hook” for those quotes is how closely they resemble the type of criticisms the right now deplores as anti american.

    If you look at the stuff conservatives have been saying about bush on immigration, it’s just as vitriolic as the stuff libs say on Iraq. We should all be free to criticize a president we feel is incompetent. Though, I think it’s obvious they were wrong about kosovo. if not about the logic of intervention than the perceived results.

    Comment by lester — June 26, 2006 @ 1:11 pm - June 26, 2006

  55. “If you look at the stuff conservatives have been saying about bush on immigration, it’s just as vitriolic as the stuff libs say on Iraq. We should all be free to criticize a president…”

    Whoa! You mean that conservatives AREN’T just mindlessly following Ian’s “Dear Leader”, or trying to shut down all criticism and civil rights?

    Hmmm, maybe it would be better to get those talking points together with him… Or alternatively, maybe you could set Ian straight for us?

    Comment by Calarato — June 26, 2006 @ 1:31 pm - June 26, 2006

  56. calorato- so are conservatives anti america because they tell the terrorists they aren’t happy with the president?

    Comment by lester — June 26, 2006 @ 3:30 pm - June 26, 2006

  57. Of course not.

    But don’t confuse that with Democrats like Cindy Sheehan, who is endorsed by Howard Dean, John Kerry, and Barbara Boxer, sending money and supplies to terrorist “freedom fighters” in Iraq while Kerry and Boxer try to save the same terrorists from annilhation by getting US forces removed.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 26, 2006 @ 3:46 pm - June 26, 2006

  58. Exactly.

    Conservatives are out to protect America. They can be wrong on one question or another but there’s the motive. Their criticism is constructive.

    Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Noam Chomsky and the hardcore “Bush Lied!!!(tm)” crowd are out to protect and defend America’s enemies – as they tell us themselves. Their criticism is intentionally destructive.

    Comment by Calarato — June 26, 2006 @ 4:41 pm - June 26, 2006

  59. VdaK –you nailed it. After 40 days of wandering in the wilderness on just water, manna, and Scripture… you come into the oasis and bitch slap the GayLeft’s Left flank. That’s gotta be some kind of record? I really do think you need to start a slightly offbeat, somewhat cynical, lampooning-kind of blog… maybe some pictures, some witty captions?

    What do ya say? Oh, you have a DAY job already… ok.

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 26, 2006 @ 10:47 pm - June 26, 2006

  60. I have a question for lester. Why does your name link to a Muslim chat room site? I’ll apologize in advance if I’m wrong about you, but that link makes me wonder about your biases in any discussion about the war against Islamist terrorism.

    Comment by Trace Phelps — June 27, 2006 @ 1:51 am - June 27, 2006

  61. If you look at the stuff conservatives have been saying about bush on immigration, it’s just as vitriolic as the stuff libs say on Iraq.

    First of all, lately I haven’t monitored the news as much as I used to. As far as I’m aware, I don’t think you can compare or put any conservative comment about Bush on the same level, which is lower than a flea’s dick.
    I am aware of opposition by some, especially RINOs and those up for election, I seriously doubt that you could compare anything they’ve said with the constant barrage of bullshit from the liberal left.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 27, 2006 @ 5:02 am - June 27, 2006

  62. Trace, in wondering about lester… just take a look at some of his commentaries. He’s kind of viewed by others as a rightwinger in there… now, that’s some serious left left left left crowd if lester is viewed as a rightwinger by them. Oy!

    Comment by Michigan-Matt — June 27, 2006 @ 1:27 pm - June 27, 2006

  63. that gay- you are saying RINOS are against Bush on immigration? that’s insane. the RINOs are the only ones supporting his stance, which virtually all republicans feel is too moderate. ann coulter’s may 17 column ended with “dial 1 for english dial 2 for new president” is she a RINO?

    Comment by lester — June 27, 2006 @ 3:28 pm - June 27, 2006

  64. cindy sheehan and the dixie chicks are not qualified political commentators. ann coulter , mike gallagher and all the other conservatives who have tarred and feathered bush over his immigration stance are. that sends a much louder message to terrorists I ‘d think. that even his BASE have abandonded him, at least on this issue. May not be the way you see it, but hey

    Comment by lester — June 27, 2006 @ 3:30 pm - June 27, 2006

  65. Christopher Hitchens, the proverbial sane and honest leftist (there’s gotta be one, right?) has 4 suggestions for you anti-war types to put your money where your mouths are: http://www.slate.com/id/2144578/

    My favorite is his suggestion 2 – that any of you who supported the “human peace shields” in Iraq in 2003 return to Iraq today, and act as human peace shields for the Iraqi people who are suffering at the hands of the Baathist diehards / terrorists.

    I’m also quite pleased by his strong support for gays in the military.

    Comment by Calarato — June 28, 2006 @ 12:02 am - June 28, 2006

  66. #11 North Dallas Thirty — June 22, 2006 @ 12:09 pm – June 22, 2006

    What GPW is saying is twofold:

    – Why didn’t Nagin request the Guard when the hurricane was coming?

    – Why didn’t Blanco send the Guard when the hurricane was coming?

    And my question is and remains, why don’t you email them and ask them? The fact that you don’t, indicates that you aren’t really interested in the answer–you just want to bloviate.

    Comment by raj — June 28, 2006 @ 10:30 am - June 28, 2006

  67. #12 GayPatriotWest — June 22, 2006 @ 12:36 pm – June 22, 2006

    I did’t mention the federal government in the post, suggesting that Nagin and Blanco were responsible for the evacuation of the city.

    Maybe they were, and maybe they weren’t, solely responsible for evacuating the city. You seem to have ignored the presumed role of FEMA–you know, the Federal Emergency Management Agency–in this. Did FEMA also have a role in evacuating the city? Apparently, at least some FEMA officials believed that they did.

    Comment by raj — June 28, 2006 @ 10:31 am - June 28, 2006

  68. #13 Michigan-Matt — June 22, 2006 @ 12:55 pm – June 22, 2006

    The historic and CONSTITUTIONAL authority to “call out” the state NG rests with the governor, raj baby. That’s reinforced in Title VI of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 93-288)… it’s been stated to excess by no less an authority than the National Governors Conference in her policy statement of HHS-13 Sec 2.

    Aside from the question of “her?” I’ll merely pose to you the question that, then, was Eisenhower’s “federalization” of the Arkansas National Guard in the school desegregation issue in Little Rock beyond his powers as Commander in Chief? I doubt it. Do you have reason to believe otherwise? If so, what?

    I’ll skim the Stafford act, but I doubt very seriously that it suggests that it precluded federal government from calling out the states’ national guards for local disaster relief. You may be able to persuade me otherwise, but I doubt it.

    Comment by raj — June 28, 2006 @ 10:31 am - June 28, 2006

  69. #65 Calarato — June 28, 2006 @ 12:02 am – June 28, 2006

    Christopher Hitchens, the proverbial sane and honest leftist ….

    Apparently you did not watch Hitchens’s debate against George Galloway on C-SPAN. Hitchens had obviously had a few too many “adult beverages” beforehand. “Sane and honest”? Honest, possibly, but “inebriated” would be more likely than “sane.”

    Hitchens is entertaining, but not much else.

    Comment by raj — June 28, 2006 @ 10:35 am - June 28, 2006

  70. Oh, jeez, a series of comments (##66-69) on the wrong thread. I’ll have to avoid having a number of comment threads open at the same time.

    Comment by raj — June 28, 2006 @ 10:42 am - June 28, 2006

  71. I’ll merely pose to you the question that, then, was Eisenhower’s “federalization” of the Arkansas National Guard in the school desegregation issue in Little Rock beyond his powers as Commander in Chief? I doubt it.

    Interesting…looks like Law Professor and International Banker Raj exchanges history for rhetoric:

    August 27: After Governor Faubus testifies that integration will result in violence, a judge issues a court order temporarily keeping African American students from enrolling at Central High.

    August 30: The NAACP successfully challenges the court order in federal court.

    September 2: Faubus announces that he is mobilizing the Arkansas National Guard to prevent violence. Thse School Board asks African American students to stay away from Central High.

    September 3: U.S. District Court Judge Ronald N. Davies orders the Little Rock School Board to proceed with integration.

    September 4: The Arkansas National Guard refuses to allow nine African American students to enter Central High School.

    September 20: U.S. District Court Judge Ronald N. Davies orders an end to state interference with the integration of Central High. The governor withdraws the Arkansas National Guard.

    September 23: Over a thousand angry white people gather outside Central High to protest the enrollment of the “Little Rock Nine.” Little Rock police officers are unable to maintain order.

    September 24: President Dwight Eisenhower sends 1200 soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock toprotect the African American students and restore order.

    September 25: Armed soldiers escort the “Little Rock Nine” to school.

    October 12: Over 6,000 white and black citizens of Little Rock participate in a day of prayer for peace in the city.

    November 27: The 101st Airborne leaves Little Rock. The Arkansas National Guard, now under federal control, is responsible for the safety of the “Little Rock Nine.”

    In short, Eisenhower followed protocol to the letter. He did not override and order out the National Guard; instead, he used the troops unarguably under his direct control to establish order and then carried out Davies’s injunction against the governor’s use of the National Guard.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 28, 2006 @ 12:47 pm - June 28, 2006

  72. #71 North Dallas Thirty — June 28, 2006 @ 12:47 pm – June 28, 2006

    The Arkansas National Guard, now under federal control, is responsible for the safety of the “Little Rock Nine.”

    Oh, so you’re admitting, contra Matt, that the President has the authority to control states’ national guard units.

    Do you actually read what you have written before you post? I tend to doubt it. You never have been able, over at IndeGayForum, to reconcile the WSJ article concerning CEO compensation with the study on which the article was supposedly based.

    Comment by raj — June 28, 2006 @ 3:07 pm - June 28, 2006

  73. LOL….nice try, Raj.

    Matt did not say that the President NEVER has the power to command state National Guard units. What he DID say is that that power has, historically and by statute, rested with the state governor, where it usually stays unless stripped from them or otherwise abrogated, as Judge Davies did in issuing the injunction against the Governor calling out the National Guard.

    And as for your last statement, I pointed out from where it came, which means anyone who chose could go verify it in the print version or online, as I did.

    Of course, the reason you’re citing that now is because IndeGayForum lost its comment archives in the process of changing over, which means that fact is unlinkable.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 28, 2006 @ 4:33 pm - June 28, 2006

  74. #73 North Dallas Thirty — June 28, 2006 @ 4:33 pm – June 28, 2006

    Matt did not say that the President NEVER has the power to command state National Guard units. What he DID say is that that power has, historically and by statute, rested with the state governor, where it usually stays unless stripped from them or otherwise abrogated, as Judge Davies did in issuing the injunction against the Governor calling out the National Guard.

    If you insist. I don’t know where you get the “exceptions” out of Matt’s statement that

    The historic and CONSTITUTIONAL authority to “call out” the state NG rests with the governor, raj baby

    which posits no exceptions, certainly along the lines that you have outlined, but, if you want to believe that there are exceptions there, feel free to do so.

    Comment by raj — June 29, 2006 @ 8:14 am - June 29, 2006

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.