Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Dirt, trash, class and politics
Posted by: McQ on Friday, September 14, 2007

John Herbert is predicting the "dirtiest presidential campaign ever". Unfortunately that's like predicting sunrise tomorrow.

He bases it, however, on a point that seems to be lost on many out there who didn't find the MoveOn ad to be that big of a deal:
Accusing a veteran soldier of "betrayal" is pretty much the same as applying the "N" word to an African-American. You just don't use an equivalent of the word "traitor" on someone who has dedicated his uniformed adult life to serving America spotlessly, fearlessly and honorably.
Yet that is precisely what the ad did and it is also what a couple of female Democratic Senators did as well. Of course we'll be treated to the hypocrisy of at least one of those Senators reacting with righteous indignation when the same sort of charges are made against her during the campaign (and they will be made, and in her case, with some credibility). Count on it.

The "honor" impaired see nothing wrong with the attack on Petraeus. Who he is, what he's done, and his many accomplishments matter not at all. As much as the side which attempted to destroy him shed crocodile tears about the welfare of the troops, Petreaus, their leader, is nothing more than cannon fodder in the political wars. A pawn to be sacrificed on the alter of political power, a nothing to be swept into the dustbin politics by those who define everything that is wrong with our system today.

Petraeus, of course, demonstrated who was the more admirable of those in the hearing room by refusing to react to the diatribes of these and other politicians. When he finally reacted, he showed considerably more class than those who attacked him:
The general, who stated at all three congressional hearings this week that his assessment reflected his views alone — not those of the Pentagon, the White House or Congress — said a poem by Rudyard Kipling proved helpful as his integrity came under attack.

Kipling’s poem, “If,” begins, “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you. …” It goes on to talk about the importance of trusting yourself when others doubt you and of maintaining your principles even when you’re hated, lied about and condemned.

Pressed to comment on the attacks against him, Petraeus offered a simple response. “I disagree with the message of those who are exercising the 1st Amendment right that generations of soldiers have sought to preserve for Americans,” he said. “Some of it was just flat completely wrong, and the rest is at least more than arguable.”
And the beat goes on ...

(HT: Keith)
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

It’s going to have to be dirty if Hillary is nominated. With her negatives already hovering around 50% she is traditionally unelectable.

That’s why the Clinton machine finds Giuliani mouth-watering. They’ll drive his negatives up as high or higher than Hillary’s and pull it out in the close states. That process is already underway.

Key to that strategy will be driving Giuliani’s negatives up among pro-lifers and cultural conservatives.

By the time they’re done with Rudy his campaign will look like a garbage barge begging for a port but finding no takers.

And the Clinton machine will dismiss the reassertion of all of her scandals as "old news," which indeed they will be.
Written By: Martin McPhillips
His response to personal insults is exactly the response one would expect from someone secure, confident, and understanding of the reality of the situation. Those who insult and demean others personally like that say more about their own character than the person they are attacking.
Written By: Scott Erb
and they will be made, and in her case, with some credibility

when you accuse a sitting senator of treason, you join the group of those who define everything that is wrong with our system today.

stay classy, McQ. we wouldn’t expect anything else.
Written By: Francis
URL: http://
when you accuse a sitting senator of treason, you join the group of those who define everything that is wrong with our system today.
Uh, I didn’t accuse her of anything but being classless, Francis. What I said was she would be subject to the "same sort of charges", i.e. charges against her credibility, just as Petreaus has suffered.
Written By: McQ
when you accuse a sitting senator of treason, you join the group of those who define everything that is wrong with our system today.
Considering that you accused an honorable man like General Petraeus of treason then they certainly makes you the most clueless hypocrite to post here.
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
Boris Erb writes:
Those who insult and demean others personally like that say more about their own character than the person they are attacking.
So, ah, Boris, do you think that constantly lying and misrepresenting things to others is insulting and demeaning to them, or do you just think of that as standard operating procedure?

Oh, and by the way, the other day you directly and unequivocally implied that any students at the University of Maine at Farmington, and any of their parents, who held a traditional view of marriage were bigots.

Would you care to take a moment to lie about that and claim you never wrote any such thing? Or maybe just reiterate your belief that they are in fact bigots?

After all, if you say it, how could it be insulting or demeaning, right? Because no point you have ever made has ever been denied.
Written By: Martin McPhillips
Hillary a traitor? Perish the thought. Wasn’t it her very own husband who defended the Constitution by inserting a cigar into the vagina of a White House intern in the Oval Office? Or did I get that slightly out of order? First came the insertion of the cigar, then came the defense of the Constitution.

That tradition of patriotism will surely be carried on in a second Clinton administration.

What was Bill’s defense for that? Something about how he takes a "wide stance" when he reaches into the humidor?
Written By: Martin McPhillips
While I’m sure Petraeus can handle whatever the rabid commies toss at him, can he handle this kind of scorn?

Note: I haven’t done anything to verify the claims there, though I did have some comments from a personal point of view.
Written By: Richard Nikoley
Most likely he’ll ignore it since it appears to be unsubstantiated rumor like a lot of stuff flying around out there:
The original report of the comment, the scoop if you will, came in something called the “Inter Press Service News Agency,” or “IPS” as the organization bills itself. What? You’ve never heard of this IPS and find yourself curious about who and what it is? IPS describes itself this way on its website: “IPS, civil society’s leading news agency, is an independent voice from the South and for development, delving into globalisation for the stories underneath. Another communication is possible.” I don’t know what any of that means either, but I figure I’d share it with you and put it our there for deconstruction.

A couple of things about this IPS “scoop”. IPS reported the alleged exchange on September 12, or yesterday to you and me. The alleged exchange occurred back in March. You also might wonder how IPS got this juicy nugget. Did Admiral Fallon put a call into the news agency renowned for “delving into globalization”? Hardly. IPS got the story from “Pentagon sources familiar with reports of the meeting.” Mind you, IPS didn’t just use just anonymous Pentagon source who might have seen the exchange. IPS relied on sources who not only didn’t witness the exchange, but didn’t even talk to people who witnessed the exchange. They were just “familiar with reports of the meeting.” Allegedly.
Now Rich you were in the service for a while, and you know how reliable something someone that far removed from the actual event may say is.

Yeah, not very.

As for Fallon:
In an interview Friday, Fallon said he and Petraeus have reached accommodation about tomorrow’s testimony. "The most important thing is I’m very happy with what Dave has recommended," he said.
Yeah, good old Dave. Sounds real touchy, doesn’t it?
Written By: McQ
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious, but it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear." — Marcus Tullius Cicero

And today, our enemies don’t carry banners,they hide amongst us trying to blend in, or throwing tantrums at airports to see how much they can get away with...
Written By: Sharpshooter
URL: http://
Is it okay to call into question the patriotism of the Lefty whiners now, after all their whinging about non-existent charges?

And I have a quote from "sources familiar with reports of" the disgusting sexual habits (such as pyro-necro-bestiality) of some of the Lefty trolls here. Guess that proves it, huh?
Written By: JorgXMcKie
URL: http://
Well, I don’t see Hilery as a traitor. Although it is clear that we have quite a few of them among the looney left. Jimmy Carter, on the other hand, may very well be a traitor.
Written By: Don
URL: http://
Don writes:
Jimmy Carter, on the other hand, may very well be a traitor.
(Voice of Mitchell Ryan’s General McAllister in the original Lethal Weapon as he oversees the torturing of Danny Glover’s character): "There are no more traitors, Sergeant Murtaugh."

(The actual line is "There are no more heroes...," which is clearly not true. At that point in the movie, Mel Gibson’s Martin Riggs, having killed Endo who was applying electroshock to him in the alleyway to get Riggs to talk, burst through a door and starts killing the bad guys.)

If we had traitors in the country, our firing squads would be putting in overtime. In fact, Danny Glover himself might be fitted for a blindfold, if we had any traitors in this country.

Written By: Martin McPhillips
Jimmy Carter, on the other hand, may very well be a traitor.
He is as much a traitor as David Petraeus.

I guess I’m the only one here who has a lot of respect for both Carter and Petraeus. In fact, I respect most on the left and the right, and really don’t buy into this ’our side good, the other side bad’ approach to politics. I can accept vast differences of political opinion without seeing another person as bad — most people are well intentioned. I guess that makes me a minority in our political world.
Written By: Scott Erb
So scott I am bad if I say you are worthless, the course you teach is worthless, every one of your comments plot lines (backhanded comment followed by uplifting liberal narrative then democrat talking point, sprinkled with esoteric verbiage) is worthless! You pander with simplistic ideas. You base your class on a movie??? How lame is that!! Only in the "safety bubble" of good old U of Maine (satellite campus) could you get away with that nonsense.

Unfortunately it seems you will never come to the realization of the shear pathetic circumstance you call life. Just remember to fail anyone one who doesn’t agree with you and tenure will soon be yours and maybe even a gig on the real campus!

If those statements speak volumes about me! So be it.
Written By: coaster
URL: http://
Yes, Coaster, your insults say more about you than they say about me. In fact, you are wearing your frustration on your sleeve. I don’t think you realize how revealing your post is. Enjoy life — I certainly do!
Written By: Scott Erb
OK now. We should all play nice together or McQ will cancel recess.
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
I can accept vast differences of political opinion without seeing another person as bad — most people are well intentioned.
Hmmm...are you telling us that when you wrote this:
It’s a failed war of aggression, an attempt at imperialism designed to assure access to oil and dominance in the region...Americans should be ashamed of what is being done in our name. It is disgusting.
you were envisioning a "well intentioned" yet disgusting act?
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
JWG: the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Good people, well intentioned, often do disgusting things. That’s why I focus on the act and the issue, not on the person. But hey, if you guys are comfortable with personal attacks, go ahead. I’ll oppose that approach and readers can make their own call.
Written By: Scott Erb
So according to you, a war of aggression is backed by good intentions. Got it.
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Yes, JWG, President Bush I’m sure was convinced this would spread democracy, markets and freedom, and be a force for positive change in the Mideast. There are a few really evil people in history, but the sad irony is that some of the most evil acts are done with a belief it will bring about a better future. That’s what makes ideology so dangerous; like religion, people who believe they have the ’right answer’ can rationalize anything to try to achieve it.
Written By: Scott Erb
Please name some people who began a "war of aggression" who you think were NOT "well intentioned".
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
" I don’t think you realize how revealing your post is."

But I have it on good authority that you really cannot tell who the ’real’ person is by reading what they post on the internet. Thus, you are no doubt in error.
Written By: timactual
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks