Read time: 2 minutes

Pat Buchanan's Conservative Rag To MoveOn: Eat Your Heart Out?

Instaputz is just asking the question: will right wing blogs and congresspeople go nuts about this cover the way they did the MoveOn ad? (h/t Agitpro

conservative betrayus cover Instaputz is just asking the question: will right wing blogs and congresspeople go nuts about this cover the way they did the MoveOn ad? (h/t Agitprop)

The article in question, by historian Andrew J. Bacevich, starts out making a common sense argument, then goes completely mental. Bacevich says that Petraeus should have been honest rather than political, and gone before Congress not to argue success of the surge. So far, so good. But Petraeus should have pressed Congress, not for a tiny lil' withdrawal based on successful benchmarks, but rather, an urgent need to...wait for it...double or triple the forces on the ground in Iraq!

Even Joe Lieberman would laugh at that one, right? Right? Um, right? Nevermind.

[UPDATE: Several reasonable correspondents have written in directly to my email saying I am misrepresenting Bacevich's argument. One of them wrote:

"Bacevich is arguing that if Patreaus was honest and logical, since according to him (Patreaus) the surge is working, he (Patreaus) would and should have asked for "...More time. More money. And above all, more troops."

I don't see how that leads to me being corrected but I want you to know you've been heard.

UPDATE 2: Okay I've read the entire comment thread for this post and I get it. Bacevich, you're saying, is writing a hypothetical speech for Petraeus based on reality-based reasoning against the war. But who is to say that if Petraeus did make this argument, the rubber stamp Congress would not just approve said increase without blinking? I hate, hate, hate to say this, but we are now beyond the point where "reasonable people" can disagree about this war. It's a quagmire based on a lie, and there is no "there" there on any position which argues that it should continue. ]

You'd think there would at least be a House vote condemning The American Conservative's editorial board for allowing such treason and disrespect to stand. The article's conclusion could have been written by, gasp, yours truly, and I've been known to wish Fidel Castro a happy birthday at my blog, for crying out loud:

The general’s relationships with official Washington remain intact. Yet he has broken faith with the soldiers he commands and the Army to which he has devoted his life. He has failed his country. History will not judge him kindly.

Can you help us out?

For 16 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit. We work 7 days a week, 16 hours a day for our labor of love, but with rising hosting and associated costs, we need your help! Could you donate $20 for 2020? Please consider a one time or recurring donation of whatever amount you can spare, or consider subscribing for an ad-free experience. It will be greatly appreciated and help us continue our mission of exposing the real FAKE NEWS!

More C&L Coverage


NOTE: We will be changing to a new commenting platform in the next couple of weeks. We will supply more details as we get closer to the change. We understand some users are having problems with comments loading and this will hopefully remedy that problem

We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service (revised 3/17/2016) for information on our posting policy.