General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
After hearing all about it, I actually saw the MoveOn.org ad on this today. I have NO IDEA what the big fuss is about. Really... why are some people all up in arms about this? Wow... the MoveOn folks think Petraeus is being a shill for the administration (frankly I don't think that's really news). So?
|
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#12 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#13 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#15 |
|
Originally posted by Wiglaf
I don't see what is wrong with either proposal? Troops who volunteered to serve are only being asked to fulfill a contract that each and every one signed with the Army. On the one hand, the Senate could have chosen to spend its time passing meaningful legislation on Iraq, and on the other hand it chose to pass legislation that does nothing but score political points with morons. |
![]() |
![]() |
#16 |
|
Oh, it should also be noted that the "second ad" MoveOn has decided to run on a vote of 3.1 million to 100k called "Congressional Representation or 'Ass-kissing little chickensh*ts'" doesn't actually exist. It's satire making light of Congress (or rather, Republicans) wasting time (and taxpayers' money) on the general being called a name.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#17 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#18 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#19 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#20 |
|
On the one hand, the Senate could have chosen to spend its time passing meaningful legislation on Iraq How is that a meaningful?
In any case I woudn't have a problem with the add if they had put it up after his report. As it is, all it shows is that moveon and their ilk doesn't really care about what is actually going on but rather want what they want regardless. |
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|