Comments on: Senate Condemns MoveOn Ad

By: Gaius

Gaius — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 19:24:19 +0000

Oh, really? Which part of Christmas in Cambodia was true then?

Oh, that’s right – it was a lie – seared, seared into the Senate record – by John Kerry.

By: ALFOR

ALFOR — Sun, 23 Sep 2007 19:18:38 +0000

Everyone seems to forget the swiftboat attacks by mastermind Karl Rove on John Kerry, who actually saw comabat in Vietnam VS G.W. who hid behind his fathers pants in the US and Chenny who got all kinds of exemptions from service.

By: John Rheney

John Rheney — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 19:38:58 +0000

I am particularly proud that all Southern Senators voted for this condemnation of the ad by Moving On!!!!

By: Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy

Public Secrets: from the files of the Irishspy — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 13:59:34 +0000

Remember these names…

Akaka, Bingaman, Boxer, Brown, Byrd, Clinton, Dodd, Durbin, Feingold, Harkin, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerry, Lautenberg, Levin, Menendez, Murray, Reed, Reid, Rockefeller, Sanders, Schumer, Stabenow, Whitehouse, Wyden These are 25 United States Senators –24 D…

By: syn

syn — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 11:42:24 +0000

Many Americans are idiots because they don’t know or refuse to acknowledge that Moveon.org, as per their own words, has bought and now owns the Democrat Party.

As for Freedom of Speech, it would appear that the pie-throwers and the stage crashers are the ones demanding Politically Correct Content of Speech; their defense is that they are simply expressing their right to dissent.

By: James

James — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 08:19:33 +0000

Hmmmm. This event falls under the catagory of “Me thinks you protest too much.”

Actually, There’s nothing wrong with MoveOn running their ad.

One of the basic cornerstones of American society is the ranting and raving about EVERYTHING. The idea that anyone would be upset about the ad “being run” is showing how poor American citizens are in citizenship skills.

There are two things folks should be aware of:

One: CONTENT of ads. You agree or disagree, to some degree. Don’t like the position? Tell them why the info is wrong. Show proof. Found something really wrong? Try a lawsuit.

Two: The American Constitutional RIGHT to run an ad, regardless of what others think. Freedom of Speech type thing.

MoveOn has every RIGHT as Americans to run that ad.

Now if you want to complain about the position the ad took, that’s something else.

Bottom line about the content; only time will tell if the General was a hoodwinker.

As for the American Senate vote, it was another demonstration as to why Americans are seen as idiots around the world.

So…What’s more important Americans? Freedom of Speech, even if you hate what someone says; Or Politically Correct Content of Speech.

Choose. (You can’t have both in a “Free Society”.)

By the way. Americans really should read some of the newspaper articles from the 1800′s about their Generals and Presidents. That MoveOn ad was TAME compared to some articles from that time period. Even President Lincoln was vilified; While in office no less.

By: Gaius

Gaius — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:54:36 +0000

Again, a good point.

By: Blue Crab Boulevard » Cue The Villagers!

Blue Crab Boulevard » Cue The Villagers! — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:51:04 +0000

[...] (Apropos this post.) The villagers waste no time in passing out the torches and pitchforks. In Dante's Inferno, the Opportunists were "the people who refused to take sides on the whole good vs. evil thing, but just looked after themselves. As a result, they're doomed to forever run after a banner while being stung by wasps and hornets… These people aren't technically in hell. They're not evil enough to be in hell, so they're in the vestibule of hell." [...]

By: reader_iam

reader_iam — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:45:01 +0000

I’m well aware of the text. I just don’t think Congress ought to be in the business of taking official action, which is what it did, with regard to individual acts of political speech. It’s a dangerous precedent; it’s a “creeping.” And I’m saying that as one who is not a fan of MoveOn, to put it mildly.

And it also plays into the hands of those who believe that our government, it only it could, would like to deal with offensive political speech (whatever that might mean, now or in the future) or dissent, officially and formally, and that it’s laying the groundwork where it can.

Consequences can so often be unintended. A bear, that reality.

By: Gaius

Gaius — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 01:32:38 +0000

You have a point, here’s the text of the amendment, however:

To express the sense of the Senate that General David II. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq, deserves the full support of the Senate and strongly condemn personal attacks on the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all members of the United States Armed Forces.

By: reader_iam

reader_iam — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:58:01 +0000

Do we really want our Congress proposing, much less passing, resolutions having to do with political speech, however odious a specific instance may be? I mean, on principle–do we really want that?

By: FedUp

FedUp — Thu, 20 Sep 2007 22:28:23 +0000

All those who voted against and especially the wanna-be commander-in chiefs should be considered traitors! Apparently their oath means nothing to them! Wonder what kind of support Hilly would get from the military…