• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

The worst democrat is better than the best republican.

Let us savor the impending downfall of lawless scoundrels who richly deserve the trouble barreling their way.

Too often we confuse noise with substance. too often we confuse setbacks with defeat.

Take your GOP plan out of the witness protection program.

Is it irresponsible to speculate? It is irresponsible not to.

Happy indictment week to all who celebrate!

A lot of Dems talk about what the media tells them to talk about. Not helpful.

Bad news for Ron DeSantis is great news for America.

Whatever happens next week, the fight doesn’t end.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

I was promised a recession.

“Everybody’s entitled to be an idiot.”

People are complicated. Love is not.

Usually wrong but never in doubt

That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

Innocent people don’t delay justice.

The truth is, these are not very bright guys, and things got out of hand.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

The arc of history bends toward the same old fuckery.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / Military / Petraeus and Hewitt

Petraeus and Hewitt

by John Cole|  July 19, 200711:35 am| 56 Comments

This post is in: Military, General Stupidity, Outrage

FacebookTweetEmail

I am actually pretty shocked that Gen. Petraeus took time from his busy schedule to appear on what is little more than an organ of the right-wing spin machine.

Just kidding. It isn’t surprising at all.

You would honestly think that the military, at the very least, would want their leadership to appear to be more than GOP party organs. Instead, Petraeus is appearing on Tinkerbell central, and now brings his credibility into question.

Excellent work, General. Was Limbaugh busy, or something?

*** Update ***

Hewitt responds to the links of disapproval:

The interview with General Petraeus generated a long list of links, some from silly people, some from extremists who denounce the general for talking to a member of the center-right media thus revealing themselves as anti-intellectual screamers, and some from writers who carefully assessed his words and made some interesting observations. Among the latter is The Belmont Club, and I think you should read all of Wretchard’s analysis.

Some examples of the “intellectual rigor” on display during this purely political interview:

HH: Do you think al Qaeda in Iraq is buckling, General Petraeus?

HH: Now stepping back a little bit from the day to day, General Petraeus, how would you explain to the civilians listening, and hundreds of thousands of them at this moment, the strategic interest of the United States at stake in Iraq?

HH: Is the media doing a good job of taking that ample amount of information and transmitting it in an objective fashion in your view, General Petraeus?

HH: Wow.

And I thought you had to go to the Creationist Museum for that kind of “intellectual rigor.”

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « The Emperor Speaks
Next Post: Open Thread »

Reader Interactions

56Comments

  1. 1.

    ThymeZone

    July 19, 2007 at 11:43 am

    HH: Do you think al Qaeda in Iraq is buckling, General Petraeus?

    DP: Well, it’s probably too soon to say that, but we think that we have them off plan.

    From the article.

    OMFG. My jaw shatters as it plummets and smashes against the floor.

    We have them Off Plan. Oh Sweet Jesus. They really did find the right liar for this job.

    When this is all over, if it ever is, I will remember those words along with Bring it On, Turning a Corner, Making Progress in Iraq, and Weapons of Mass Destruction.

    We have them Off Plan. Oh, give me oxygen. Oh Christ.

    The.Mind.Boggles.

  2. 2.

    Jake

    July 19, 2007 at 11:47 am

    “…and some enablers, as they’re called.”

    Too. Much. Irony … *

  3. 3.

    Dreggas

    July 19, 2007 at 11:48 am

    What did you expect? Petraeus had the backing of the Fluffer In Chief, Joe Liebershit, of course he’d go on Hewitt’s show to help get him “primed” in the way only fluffers can.

  4. 4.

    Bubblegum Tate

    July 19, 2007 at 11:57 am

    We have them Off Plan.

    We have them Off Plan over there so we don’t go Off Message over here.

    Seriously, though, I respect Petraeus a bunch, but this is just plain pathetic from top to bottom.

  5. 5.

    Zifnab

    July 19, 2007 at 12:02 pm

    You would honestly think that the military, at the very least, would want their leadership to appear to be more than GOP party organs.

    Are you fucking kidding? The military has been sucking GOP nut since the fifties. It probably had something to do with the Truman Commission to investigate military contractor malpractice and snowballed from there. Military brass love the GOP because the GOP loves the military contractors and the military contractors make sure that high ranking army officers totally bank as lobbyists and salesmen after they retire.

    But the GOP and the Armed Services have been in bed together for generations. This should be a surprise to exactly no-one. What comes as a surprise is the way Bush has managed to alienate so many of his own military commanders when they all still know who signs their paychecks every month.

  6. 6.

    Tom Hilton

    July 19, 2007 at 12:06 pm

    Meanwhile, local wingnut Debra Saunders says she won’t admit it’s time to withdraw until Petraeus says it’s unwinnable. Because of course Petraeus is going to be totally objective and honest and not just say what he was hired to say. Why, he wouldn’t go on a fair and balanced show like Hewitt’s if he had any bias.

  7. 7.

    Tom Hilton

    July 19, 2007 at 12:07 pm

    We have them Off Plan over there so we don’t go Off Message over here.

    That is beautiful.

  8. 8.

    BFR

    July 19, 2007 at 12:10 pm

    I am actually pretty shocked that Gen. Petraeus took time from his busy schedule to appear on what is little more than an organ of the right-wing spin machine.

    It actually makes sense if your goal is only to keep the 28%crowd from abandoning ship.

    You would honestly think that the military, at the very least, would want their leadership to appear to be more than GOP party organs.

    If he doesn’t do the show, they can fire him and find someone who will. Granted, it’s not quite that simple but Petraeus likely sold his soul a long time ago.

  9. 9.

    Paul L.

    July 19, 2007 at 12:26 pm

    I am actually pretty shocked that Gen. Petraeus took time from his busy schedule to appear on what is little more than an organ of the right-wing spin machine.

    Shocking next you will tell me that paragon of truth Joe Wilson appears on the Keith Olbermann.

    I find it funny that you are calling Hugh Hewitt a organ of the right-wing spin machine. (A point on which I agree) by linking to Glenn Greenwald a organ of the left-wing spin machine.

  10. 10.

    ThymeZone

    July 19, 2007 at 12:28 pm

    Shocking next you will tell me that paragon of truth Joe Wilson

    Joe Wilson is not the point man in keeping the country in a useless, expensive and dishonest war, you stupid shit.

    Where do you come up with this crap you post? Is ankle biting like a little yappy Chihuahua all you can muster?

  11. 11.

    Jake

    July 19, 2007 at 12:40 pm

    Joe Wilson is not the point man in keeping the country in a useless, expensive and dishonest war, you stupid shit.

    Unless he means this Joe Wilson.

    If he means former diplomat Wilson, he tried to keep us out of a useless, expensive clusterfuck of a war and we all know where that got him and his wife. So maybe Pet’s rattling off the party line to protect his family from The Family.

    But I think we should go easy on PaulEll. Apparently his yappy lap dogs ate the jackalopes and I’m sure he’s heartbroken.

  12. 12.

    Paul L.

    July 19, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    Joe Wilson is not the point man in keeping the country in a useless, expensive and dishonest war, you stupid shit.

    And Gen. Petraeus is the “point man” in keeping the US in Iraq?
    What about George W. Bush/Tony Snow/Dick Cheney/Sec. of Defense Gates?

    Is ankle biting like a little yappy Chihuahua all you can muster?

    I saw the opportunity to take a shot at Glenn Greenwald, Joe Wilson and Keith Olbermann.
    Like Tom Hilton did with “local wingnut Debra Saunders”.

  13. 13.

    jg

    July 19, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    Greenwald is a shrill lefty. He’s repetitve to the point of making you ill. But he does not spin.

  14. 14.

    Tony J

    July 19, 2007 at 12:51 pm

    Petraeus angled for this job on the grounds that he was The Anti-Insurgency Guy, didn’t he? And he took it knowing full-well that the troops simply didn’t exist to carry out the kind of anti-insurgency strategy he’d won that honorific by formulating.

    What does that tell you? Other than that he’s a willing placeholder, a Comma-in-Chief if you will. He knows he can’t do the job he was given, but in common with most of the people El Residente promotes, that’s not really relevent to the job at hand, which appears to be giving the Occupation a patina of credibility for another Friedman or two. Come September he’ll be saying how impressed he is by the progress Operation Surge to Victory has made, and if he can have just a couple of hundred (thousand) more troops, everything will be ponies and ticklesticks.

    The fact that he feels compelled to do a bit of pre-emptive fluffing on the Home Front would appear to suggest that the White House is flustered enough by the recent Congressional Sleepover to commence withdrawals from the Bank of Petraeus Credibility Fund a little earlier than planned.

  15. 15.

    Tsulagi

    July 19, 2007 at 12:54 pm

    You would honestly think that the military, at the very least, would want their leadership to appear to be more than GOP party organs. Instead, Petraeus is appearing on Tinkerbell central, and now brings his credibility into question.

    Yep. It’s the selling of The Surge. Iraqi government restricting reporters’ access to locations insurgents have attacked and trying to prevent photos/film of the aftermath of the larger ones. Don’t want that on the teevee. New DoD restrictions on milbloggers. Wouldn’t want anything not sunny written to cloud judgment by the readers or a YouTube of anything more edgy than The Stroll by McCain.

    Now Petraeus. He’s a good guy, but no doubt he’s being “encouraged” to do his part too. You think the previous Surgeon General, the one prohibited from attending the Special Olympics because the evildoer Kennedy family supports that organization, was the only general who gets brilliant direction from the caped Commander Guy?

    Petraeus has been given the only mission that matters to this spoiled brat admin…carry the sack of shit that has become OIF to the next guy. The president has a deep sense of responsibility and accountability like that.

    Just a prediction, but it looks like the immediate plan is for Petraeus to call The Surge a qualified success in September with the admin doing anything at that time to get another Friedman unit. That would get them into March/April of next year. By then the Dem/Pub prez nominees will be known. Then at that time, the line from Baghdad Bob Tony Snow could be something along the lines of “The president doesn’t want to foreclose any options in fighting the GSAVE on the next president.” Mission Accomplished.

  16. 16.

    Davebo

    July 19, 2007 at 12:55 pm

    Look, is Hugh Hewitt a mouthpiece for the GOP?

    Definately. Without a shred of freakin doubt.

    Is General Petraus now a mouthpiece of the GOP?

    No, more a mouthpiece of Dick Cheney. He certainly has every right to appear on whatever show he wants. But it tends to spoil the argument that we can’t do anything until he opens that mouthpiece in September.

  17. 17.

    Punchy

    July 19, 2007 at 12:58 pm

    What about George W. Bush/Tony Snow/Dick Cheney/Sec. of Defense Gates?

    Paul, you owe me a new keyboard, perferably a spit-up-proof one this time.

  18. 18.

    Jake

    July 19, 2007 at 1:05 pm

    Wow, General, that’s a huge piece you’ve got there [pant, pant]. You can almost smell the relief in Who’s voice as he realizes Pet isn’t going to spank him a la Wm. Odom.

    Now Petraeus. He’s a good guy, but no doubt he’s being “encouraged” to do his part too.

    No. If he’s dragging out this rat orgy to satisfy the Child-in-Charge he isn’t a good guy. He’s the opposite of a good guy. Maybe he was a good guy, but once any leader starts making decisions based not on reality but what he (or someone else) wants to be reality, you’ve got what is known as a bad guy.

  19. 19.

    pacified

    July 19, 2007 at 1:05 pm

    Generals who are more concerned about politics and the President, instead of the men they command, deserve no respect.

  20. 20.

    Paul L.

    July 19, 2007 at 1:07 pm

    Paul, you owe me a new keyboard, perferably a spit-up-proof one this time.

    You can have the one jg owns me.

    Greenwald is a shrill lefty. He’s repetitve to the point of making you ill. But he does not spin.

  21. 21.

    Redleg

    July 19, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    For a person of Hewitt’s caliber, those are rigorous questions.

  22. 22.

    Barry

    July 19, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    “You would honestly think that the military, at the very least, would want their leadership to appear to be more than GOP party organs. Instead, Petraeus is appearing on Tinkerbell central, and now brings his credibility into question.”

    I question whether or not they *are* anything more than GOP party organs, for the most part.

  23. 23.

    Pug

    July 19, 2007 at 1:11 pm

    And Gen. Petraeus is the “point man” in keeping the US in Iraq?

    Well, yes he is.

    You can see this one coming from miles away. The Decider leaves the decision up to his hand picked general. The hand picked general reports that, surprise, everything the Decider has been saying is true. There is progress. The surge is working. We need more time.

    Who can argue with a general? Of course, isn’t it supposed to be elected civilians in the U.S. giving orders to the generals and not the other way around?

  24. 24.

    Dreggas

    July 19, 2007 at 1:22 pm

    HH: Do you think al Qaeda in Iraq is buckling, General Petraeus?

    HH: Now stepping back a little bit from the day to day, General Petraeus, how would you explain to the civilians listening, and hundreds of thousands of them at this moment, the strategic interest of the United States at stake in Iraq?

    HH: Is the media doing a good job of taking that ample amount of information and transmitting it in an objective fashion in your view, General Petraeus?

    HH: Wow.

    Translation:

    lot’s of sucking/slurping sounds followed by an audible swallowing noise…

  25. 25.

    demimondian

    July 19, 2007 at 1:32 pm

    But, John, it *is* intellectual rigor. The problem is that the right margin of your screen cut of the last word. The original read “intellectual rigor mortis”.

  26. 26.

    Bubblegum Tate

    July 19, 2007 at 1:50 pm

    But, John, it is intellectual rigor. The problem is that the right margin of your screen cut of the last word. The original read “intellectual rigor mortis”.

    ZING! Now that’s a good line.

  27. 27.

    dmbeaster

    July 19, 2007 at 1:55 pm

    Why expect anything objective out of Petraeus? The summary at Greenwald of his past cheerleading is damning.

    I could care less about his alleged military smarts — he has been a propogandist for the Bush administration this entire war. He has been making rosy conclusions and predictions the entire war, and been consistently wrong. There is no reason at all to believe that his current plan is influenced more by practicalities rather than more by politics.

    He was selected because he will play Bush’s political game regarding this war. The Hugh Hewitt appearance confirms that. He promotes himself for years by advertising his willingness to be a political tool, and surprise, he is rewarded under Bush so he can fulfill that role.

  28. 28.

    jrg

    July 19, 2007 at 1:57 pm

    Shocking next you will tell me that paragon of truth Joe Wilson

    The man told the truth when Bush was lying to get us into a war, you dickless troll. Hundreds of thousands of people are dead as a result (including the women and children you were railing about yesterday).

  29. 29.

    Tom Hilton

    July 19, 2007 at 1:59 pm

    Like Tom Hilton did with “local wingnut Debra Saunders”.

    Given how far divorced from reality one has to be to think Iraq is anything but a catastrophic clusterfuck, ‘wingnut’ is just about the kindest possible term to use for a war supporter.

  30. 30.

    Perry Como

    July 19, 2007 at 2:08 pm

    And Gen. Petraeus is the “point man” in keeping the US in Iraq?

    He is now. Bush fired all of the generals that wanted to get the troops out of Iraq.

  31. 31.

    Jake

    July 19, 2007 at 2:12 pm

    I question whether or not they are anything more than GOP party organs….

    And the GOP plays with it’s organs, a lot.

    It’s that kind of party.

  32. 32.

    Rome Again

    July 19, 2007 at 2:15 pm

    And Gen. Petraeus is the “point man” in keeping the US in Iraq?
    What about George W. Bush/Tony Snow/Dick Cheney/Sec. of Defense Gates?

    When the GOP Congress is waiting on his report to take any action in getting us out of Iraq, YES!

  33. 33.

    RobF

    July 19, 2007 at 3:11 pm

    Hey COLE, how about commenting on the DEMs attempt to
    remove and admendent to homeland security that would
    protect citizens that report suspicious behavior that
    could lead to a terror strike…or is that tongue of
    yours tsk tsk’ing, that A correction is needed from all
    the paranoia.

    I puke on the Bushies, but then democrats express their view that terrorism is a con game, what’s a voter to do.

  34. 34.

    Cassidy

    July 19, 2007 at 3:24 pm

    That’s quite large assumption to assume that the military is part of the “GOP machine”. Most of us live outside the political squabbles.

    Something else to keep in mind is that morale is a force modifier. Do you really expect the lead guy to go on national television and say that the job is being done poorly.

  35. 35.

    Rusty Shackleford

    July 19, 2007 at 3:25 pm

    jg Says:

    Greenwald is a shrill lefty. He’s repetitve to the point of making you ill. But he does not spin.

    July 19th, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    Is Greenwald “shrill” like Paul Krugman is “shrill”?

    I’ve learned that words “shrill” and “smear”, when translated from Republicanese, mean “correct” and “factually sound”.

    Handjobs like Paul L. continue on with the tired talking points the Right passed out ages ago. It’s still “Clown Wilson” and “Shrill Greenwald”, and forever will be in their “looniverse”, facts be damned.

    It’s one thing to be stupid, you can’t help it. It’s quite another to lie to yourself. The Paul L.’s of the world lie to themselves. It’s part of the reason why they’re so angry. They can’t even trust themselves.

  36. 36.

    DougJ

    July 19, 2007 at 3:38 pm

    Great catch, John. I hadn’t seen this elsewhere.

  37. 37.

    Pb

    July 19, 2007 at 3:39 pm

    that paragon of truth Joe Wilson

    Compared to the idiots who smear him, he might as well be the fucking Oracle of Delphi.

    I saw the opportunity to take a shot at Glenn Greenwald, Joe Wilson and Keith Olbermann.

    See above; nice spinning, Paul L. — but next time, try adding facts in the rinse cycle.

  38. 38.

    chopper

    July 19, 2007 at 4:05 pm

    OMFG. My jaw shatters as it plummets and smashes against the floor.

    We have them Off Plan. Oh Sweet Jesus. They really did find the right liar for this job.

    given all the softballs hewitt lobbed at the guy, you’d think he could come up with something better.

    “so general, if you were an ice cream flavor, what flavor would you be?”

    “uh…is ‘failure’ a flavor?”

  39. 39.

    Tom Hilton

    July 19, 2007 at 4:09 pm

    I’ve learned that words “shrill” and “smear”, when translated from Republicanese, mean “correct” and “factually sound”.

    More or less. To be a little more precise, they mean “we can’t plausibly deny the substance of what this person says, so we’ll divorce tone from substance and try to discredit it on the basis of the former.”

  40. 40.

    Wilfred

    July 19, 2007 at 4:28 pm

    Well I like it. Slang was getting boring, but the Gin’ral saved the day.

    “You better not mess with me, yo. I’ll knock ya motherfucking ass off plan, motherfucker. You readin’ me?” Oooooh.

    My boxer puppy just tore up my tomato patch. When I catch him, I’m gonna off plan his ass.

    I like it. The rest of you snide bastards can go OP yourselves.

  41. 41.

    jg

    July 19, 2007 at 4:46 pm

    OK shrill was the wrong word. Get over it.

    RobF Says:

    Hey COLE, how about commenting on the DEMs attempt to
    remove and admendent to homeland security that would
    protect citizens that report suspicious behavior that
    could lead to a terror strike…or is that tongue of
    yours tsk tsk’ing, that A correction is needed from all
    the paranoia.

    I puke on the Bushies, but then democrats express their view that terrorism is a con game, what’s a voter to do.

    Protect them from what? What danger is there in reporting suspicious behavior?

  42. 42.

    Zifnab

    July 19, 2007 at 5:04 pm

    Protect them from what? What danger is there in reporting suspicious behavior?

    Ok, so let’s say there was a ticking time bomb and you, Jack Bauer, needed to punch a guy in the face after wrapping your fist in razor wire. Suddenly, a jackalope hops out of the bushes and reports you to the police. This legislation would prevent you from being dragged off before you could grab the bomb, shove it down your pants, jump out of the plane, and detonate it in mid-air, with the concussive blast knocking you to safety.

    Under the status quo, Jack Bauer would be thrown in jail and some major US city would be reduced to rubble. Under the Republican amendment, we’d have the makings of a blockbuster motion picture. But moonbats are too busy sucking up to the ACLU to remember what is important.

  43. 43.

    Grumpy Code Monkey

    July 19, 2007 at 5:15 pm

    The only way Petraeus will give anything other than an optimistic assessment in September is if there is a catastrophic and highly visible meltdown in security that’s obvious to even the most wilfully self-deluded wingnut, regardless of whether he’s been a cheerleader for this administration or not. He’s a General, of course he’s going to put the best face on a military operation as he possibly can. That’s what generals do.

    The situation in September will probably not be any worse than it is now; that will be proof enough that the surge is working, and the Deciderator will remind us to be patient, that he realizes more than anyone else that war is not easy, and that we cannot afford to lose or else something really bad will happen…somewhere…

  44. 44.

    Jake

    July 19, 2007 at 5:42 pm

    Ok, so let’s say there was a ticking time bomb and you, Jack Bauer, needed to punch a guy in the face after wrapping your fist in razor wire.

    Holy shit but that’s funny.

    Especially the part where you suggest anything Eddie’s little brother does would be viewed as suspicious by a red-blooded jackalope.

  45. 45.

    John S.

    July 19, 2007 at 6:19 pm

    Given how far divorced from reality one has to be to think Iraq is anything but a catastrophic clusterfuck, ‘wingnut’ is just about the kindest possible term to use for a war supporter.

    Around here, we refer to Paul L. as our resident ‘zombie colon’. Somehow – despite being torn through the ass of the undead – he manages to tap out meaningless posts with his dangling entrails.

    And I still think that’s pretty kind to Paul once you become familiar with his special brand of stupidity.

  46. 46.

    Rome Again

    July 19, 2007 at 6:27 pm

    Something else to keep in mind is that morale is a force modifier. Do you really expect the lead guy to go on national television and say that the job is being done poorly.

    NO, that’s the whole point.

  47. 47.

    Cassidy

    July 19, 2007 at 7:37 pm

    NO, that’s the whole point.

    So what is the point? That a General is being a General? Newsflash: grass is green.

  48. 48.

    John S.

    July 19, 2007 at 11:01 pm

    So what is the point? That a General is being a General? Newsflash: grass is green.

    Yes, I can just imagine Admiral Dewey sitting down for an ‘honest’ chat about the status of his naval campaign in the Spanish-American War with William Randolph Hearst…

    Generals should be in the business of commanding troops – not having pep talks with pseudo-journalists.

  49. 49.

    Badtux

    July 19, 2007 at 11:51 pm

    Rome. Late Rome. Where competent generals were swiftly purged and replaced with incompetents because it was feared that competent generals might, like, actually defy the Emperor or even worse might march on Rome and seize the imperial throne for themselves.

    The Busheviks can’t tolerate anything less than lickspittle devotion from their military lackeys, feels threatened by anybody who dares contradict the Imperial edicts of what is “real” and “not real”, which is why everybody in the top military leadership with the least bit of spine has been purged. The problem is that lickspittles don’t have the spine to actually, like, win. Which is fine right now, when, as with Rome in 300AD, we don’t have any real enemies capable of taking on our military. But the problem is that as the empire decays, real enemies arise… and if you have by then destroyed the competence of the imperial legions, you end up with a real enemy destroying your military like the Goths destroyed Valens’ army at the Battle of Adrianople in 378. That was a direct consequence of decades of purges of the officer corps to reward obedience over competence — military historians are quick to point out that if traditional Roman discipline and competence had been in place, the majority of Valens’ army would have formed up into squares and marched right through the Gothic heavy cavalry to safety.

    The only question is this: How long to our own Adrianople? Given the speed at which things happen nowdays (I mean, the U.S. went from republic to empire in record time compared to how long it took Rome to do so!), I can only guess that it will be too soon for our own comfort.

    – Badtux the History Penguin

  50. 50.

    Bob

    July 20, 2007 at 10:08 am

    I’m glad all you left nuts know what’s good for us. I’ve turned off my tv (except for Fox) because of your left nut MSM. We’ve been here all along but were suppressed by your MSM. Thank GOD for the internet. (and Fox) :-)

  51. 51.

    Jason Van Steenwyk

    July 21, 2007 at 1:25 am

    Heh. We support the troops. By calling them “shills” when they don’t predict disaster.

    You guys are beyond stupid. This whole thread is an ad hominem argument.

    And it’s not even a very good one, because no one here has defended his or her criticisms of Petraeus by referencing the text and substance of his remarks.

    Hewitt asks some softballs. And that’s Petraeus’s fault?

    And his decision to agree to an interview with Hewitt is somehow dispositive? That’s absurd. The only way you can draw the kind of conclusion you’re trying to draw is if you could demonstrate that Hewitt was repeatedly accepting interviews with people like Limbaugh, Hannity, and O’Reilly, but had a long pattern of refusing interviews with more mainstream news sources.

    But if such a pattern exists, no one has bothered to demonstrate it.

    Congratulations, John Cole. You’ve created quite a cesspool of lazy-assed groupthinkers here.

  52. 52.

    bains

    July 21, 2007 at 2:28 am

    I note that your first link went to Glenn Greenwald. And you say “Petraeus is appearing on Tinkerbell central…” Such irony.

    ps why not link the actual interview? Afraid that folks might make up their own mind outside your and Greenwald’s narrative?

  53. 53.

    Jason Van Steenwyk

    July 21, 2007 at 8:14 am

    Actually, what I meant to say was this whole retarded thread was an ad hominem attack, except that it’s even an incompetent ad hominem, because you’re actually attacking General Petraeus by objecting to Hugh Hewitt!!!!

    Balloon Juice Logic:

    “I hate brussel sprouts! ‘Cause my mom’s a lousy driver!”

  54. 54.

    John Cole

    July 21, 2007 at 3:58 pm

    Yes, Jason. Appearing on a blatantly partisan talk radio show in which softball questions are lobbed at you so you can respond with dull platitudes does compromise the appearance of independence. I am not blaming Petraeus for the questions Hewitt asked, I am blaming him for not having the common sense to decline the interview in the first place.

    The dumbest thing in all of this is that you all have bought so far into the belief system that the liberal media is out to get you that Petraeus even considers appearing on shows run by wankers like Hewitt.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Terror Of A Different Sort at Conservative Times--Republican GOP news source. says:
    July 20, 2007 at 12:20 pm

    […] Balloon Juice: I am actually pretty shocked that General Petraeus took time from his busy schedule to appear on what is little more than an organ of the right-wing spin machine. […]

  2. Two Scott Thomas Beauchamp investigations, two results « Cadillac Tight says:
    August 3, 2007 at 1:02 pm

    […] Andrew Sullivan, Kevin Drum, and John Cole are going to darkly insinuate that the Army’s investigation can’t be trusted…after all, the commanding General in Iraq, David Petraeus, is nothing but a Bush tool, and any unit under his command is going to push poignant stories like Beauchamp’s under the rug so that the CinC’s glorious legacy may be preserved. […]

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Matt McIrvin on Sassy (Jun 1, 2023 @ 7:47am)
  • trnc on Late Night Open Thread: And Nothing Of Value Was Lost (Jun 1, 2023 @ 7:42am)
  • Matt McIrvin on Sassy (Jun 1, 2023 @ 7:40am)
  • trnc on Late Night Open Thread: And Nothing Of Value Was Lost (Jun 1, 2023 @ 7:39am)
  • eclare on Late Night Open Thread: And Nothing Of Value Was Lost (Jun 1, 2023 @ 7:38am)

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Seattle Meetup on Sat 5/13 at 5pm!

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!