Friday, September 21, 2007


“Before a single Democrat condemns MoveOn's ad, they should insist that George W. Bush and the Republican Party repudiate the anti-military smears on war heroes that have been the hallmark of Mr. Bush's political career.” This is a statement from Paul Begala, in a post on Huffingon Post today.

We do not think it is necessary for us to insist that President Bush repudiate earlier smears. Those smears were unjustified. Is this Move-On full page ad a smear? If so, it should be condemned, not defended. Not excused by the fact that the Republicans have smeared war heros.

Move-On asked the reader whether the reader thought that General Petreaus was betraying us (in a sense). Posing the thought as a question, Move-On left themselves wiggle room. However, the effect is to suggest that the General is about to betray us. The word should not have been used. Of course it was not intended literally, but that does not excuse its use.

Why hit below the belt? When you are on the high road, why slip or step into the ditch?