…And now Dan Proft has also joined the conservative bandwagon and called Gen. Petraeus a “traitor”, just like other con partisans from Hugh Hewitt to Pete Hegseth. Go figure.
Again, like those he’s echoing, Mr. Proft is complaining that his fellow Americans (ie, MoveOn.org) are exercising their freedom of speech while simultaneously fibbing by putting words in their collective mouth.
MoveOn.org never called Gen. Petraeus a traitor.
Dan Proft did.
MoveOn.org never compared Gen. Petraeus to infamous turncoats such as Benedict Arnold, Robert Hanssen or Aldrich Ames.
Dan Proft did.
Why is Dan Proft calling the commander in charge in Iraq a traitor and comparing him to the likes of Benedict Arnold? MoveOn.org certainly didn’t do that while they pointed out the many facts which Gen. Petraeus and his political patrons at the White House are ignoring as they betray the truth before us all.
Could Mr. Proft be doing this because he wants to cover up the fact that Gen. Petraeus is using Enron-style accounting methods to make a surge “success” suddenly appear, despite the fact every independent indicator (whether Iraqi or American) is indicating violence has either not generally improved or has actually gotten worse in some areas? (Instead car bombs are no longer being counted and people who are shot from the front are also not counted in death tallies. You have to actually be shot in the back of the head before the conservatives in charge of such number-crunching count your death as “sectarian violence”. It’s bizarre the lengths that Gen. Westmoreland the conservatives will go to to cook the books and ignore the reality right there in front of them.)
Could it be because Mr. Proft wants to cover up the fact that the surge has actually failed at its one goal, as stated by our Commander in Chief, which was to provide the Iraqi politicians “breathing space” to come to political resolutions and quell factional discontent? (Instead the Iraqi Parliament took August off while our honorable troops sweated through the grime, with many offering the ultimate sacrifice to give those Iraqi Parliamentarians “breathing space” at their vacation villas.)
Could it be because Mr. Proft doesn’t comprehend the utter disconnect between Gen. Petraeus’ “rosy scenario” dog and pony shows indicating we’re supposedly ‘winning’ and his dire prediction that our troops may have stay in Iraq for as long as a decade? (Instead, Mr. Proft apparently wants us to believe, as so many of that dwindling minority do, that we have to stay in Iraq indefinitely because … well … well, because … actually, they have no valid reason for staying in Iraq since every excuse they’ve used has proven to be wrong and hollow. But because we’re “winning” according to their shiny fuzzy-math numbers, they tell ya we must stay til we just can’t “win” no more.)
Could it be because Mr. Proft, as partisans are wont to do, would like to take political advantage of the false gesture made by claiming we can reduce our surge forces back to pre-surge levels due to the (Enron-style) “success”… even though those surge forces need to return home anyway because their 15-month deployments will be ending? (Oops, Karl Rove beat Mr. Proft to that one.)
Could it be because Mr. Proft is more worried about a friggin’ newspaper ad than bringing our brave soldiers and Marines home and finding the actual diabolical mastermind behind the Sept. 11th attacks and many other attacks globally before and since? (Of course, we already know Pres. Bush considers Osama bin Forgotten to be out of sight, out of mind. Then again, Iraq never had anything to do with 9/11 in the first place.)
Could it be because Mr. Proft is a partisan blowhard who (in his own words) is “more interested in defending a position than engaging in a quest for a solution? (On that point his knee-jerk reaction is clearly to point one finger at his arch-nemesis … the Left … while pointing several more fingers back at himself. Then again, Mr. Proft likely doesn’t agree with these rational solutions proposed by Republicans or the Pentagon anyway since they echo solutions promoted by [gasp] the Left…)
We report. He distorts. You decide.
Why ‘LS continues to air his malarkey is beyond all rationality, but apparently there’s a buck to be made in the fantasy role-playing biz, eh.
5 comments
Comments feed for this article
September 13, 2007 at 6:52 pm
Dan Proft
It’s a little known technique called “sarcasm”. Only someone intentionally attempting to miss the point of my piece could allege I seriously called Petraeus a traitor. Moveon.org did exactly as you say they did not. Their ad concluded, “Today, before Congress and before the American people, General Petraeus is likely to become General Betray Us.”
I take that accusation of betrayal of the Congress and the American people to be tantamount to calling the General a traitor.
The rest of your rant, I greatly appreciate as a an endorsement of my allegation that the Democrat Party has become one big temper tantrum.
Regards,
Dan Proft
September 13, 2007 at 7:35 pm
robnesvacil
Mr. Proft,
I understand sarcasm well. Had you bothered to actually read what you consider a “rant” (let alone my other postings) you’d know that.
But, in your sarcasm, you chose to put words into other peoples’ mouths. Why are you whining just because someone is calling you out on it? Grow a spine.
As far as tantrums go, the very fact that you’d even bother writing (sarcastic or not) about an ad in the face of 30,000 wounded troops and 4000 who’ve given us their ultimate sacrifice puts the lie to your partisan claims as to just who is throwing hissy fits.
Again, perhaps you simply don’t comprehend the ad (let alone the above discussion) which was simply pointing out the truth behind the conservatives’ partisan — political appointee Gen. David Petraeus included — use of fuzzy math to promote a continuation of this ill-conceived and ill-executed war.
(Gen. Petraeus’ superior officer, Adm. William Fallon, CENTCOM’s chief, has reportedly called the general an “ass-kissing little chickenshit”. Adm. Fallon is, of course, outranked by the commander in chief who may have had some use for an “ass-kissing little chickenshit” and any associated dog and pony shows said “ass-kissing little chickenshit” might be able to muster.)
Cordially,
Rob Nesvacil
PS: If you want to talk about temper tantrums, perhaps you could talk to your friend and fellow conservative Tony Peraica who has been known to storm the castle long after most reasonable folks went to bed and keeps known thugs and self-admitted drunks in his campaign’s employ (Mr. Peraica met Mr. Ichniowski while defending him in court after he had slashed a bunch of nuns’ tires)… Say, weren’t you Commissioner Peraica’s campaign manager as he ran for County Board President? Then surely you must know a thing or two about tantrums having been a first-hand witness.
September 17, 2007 at 1:22 pm
Betraying our intrepid troops « Illinois Reason
[...] Monday, September 17th, 2007 in President George W. Bush, Republicans by robnesvacil Much ruckus was made last week about MoveOn.org’s “General Petraeus … or General Betray Us” full-page ad. Conservative partisans were apoplectic and could not type fast enough to shove their interpretation of the ad into the media, essentially putting their words into MoveOn’s mouth. [...]
August 5, 2009 at 2:54 pm
darek
Rob,
Change the name of your blog. There is nothing reasonable on it.
August 6, 2009 at 1:42 pm
robnesvacil
Darek,
This blogpost is two years old at this point and that’s the message you choose to leave on it? Your two-years-too-late quip wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact Mr. Proft is now running for governor would it?
And do tell, just what do you find unreasonable about pointing out Mr. Proft’s obsequiousness with his own voice?