SIX DEGREES OF UNDERMINING THE TROOPS

by Steve Young

Reaction to General Petreaus's congressional appearance couldn't be more on script.

Democrats took heavy pains to preface their questioning of the general by praising his honorable and courageous service to the country. Faster than a Sean Hannity minute, the radio Lords of Loud went Frank Luntz all over the Dems blasting them for their egregious attack on our troops while they are "in harm's way."

"Undermining the troops" followed closely by "emboldening the enemy," or even worse, "wanting America to lose the war," has always been a go-to branding employed by Republican mouthpieces whose job is to label anything a Democrat says as a damning of our soldiers.

Democrats might say that asking why a soldier is aiming their rifle in the wrong direction is not a denunciation of the soldier, but a patriotic request for a clarification from those who ordered the soldier to point the wrong way.

How, Kevin Bacon might ask, is asking questions of a man who has shown up to answer questions be deemed so malicious?

It's really a fun game.

Wanna play?

1. Senator Hillary Clinton asked General Petreaus "Don't you think the American people deserve a very specific answer about what is expected from our country in the face of the failure of the Iraqi government and its failure to achieve its political agenda?"
2. General Petreaus is in charge of American troops in Iraq who are attempting to supply the security for the Iraq Government that has failed to achieve their political agenda.
3. Clinton is blaming our troops for the Iraqi Government's failure.

Bam. Democrat "undermining the troops."

See it's easy. Wanna try something a little tougher?

1. House Majority Leader, Nancy Pelosi said, "We need a new direction in Iraq that will protect our troops, promote stability in the region, and make America more secure."
2. Pelosi is from San Francisco where they have more gay pride parades than cable cars.
3. Most of the "Village People" group were gay, with one member dressing as a soldier and after recording "In The Navy," as a sailor.
4. With Pelosi's own constituents wearing the uniform of our brave fighting men and women in Iraq, how in the hell does she expect to "protect our troops" when the Village People haven't had a hit in over 25 years?

There y'go. "Undermining the troops", "Cutting and running" and questioning their sexuality at the same time. Shameful.

But if you really want to play the game you have to be prepared to push the envelope.

1. Republican John Warner asked General Petreaus whether his strategy will make us safer.
2. Warner was once married to Elizabeth Taylor, a registered Democrat.
3. Taylor is close friends with Michael Jackson.
4. Michael Jackson, who was brought up on child-sexual-abuse charges, teamed with Paul McCartney to record "Ebony and Ivory" depicting the need for blacks and whites to be in harmony with each other to for this world to be at peace.
5. Our integrated troops are trying to bring peace to Iraq while Democrats question whether or not our brother and sisters "in harms way" are questioning their heroic efforts to make America safer.

Bam. Child-abusing, racist Democrat "undermines the troops." Beautiful.

See if you can take Democratic Senators Chuck Hagel and Richard Lugar questions to General Petreaus and connect them to "shoving the knife in the back of our heroes." That's a new one I'm working on.

Fun, huh?

Not really.

Mark my words, if we don't soon stop these "blame-America-first" Democrats from "undermining the troops," it won't be long we our undermined troops won't be able "fight them over there, so we don't have to fight Kevin Bacon over here."

Despite what journalist Bill O'Reilly said today about MoveOn.org receiving a special discount rate for their NY Time's Genral Petreaus display ad, based on the fact that the Times is in bed with Moveon.org and George Soros.

Reporting on a report from ABC's Jake Tapper, he said that Moveon.org received a 65% discount as a "family discount," because the Times and Moveon are in bed with each other; that "if you're a left-wing smear site the Times will give you a discount."

Problem is, Bill O'Reilly could get the same rate OR LOWER!

So says, Katherine Mathis, Vice President of Corporate Communications at the Times.

"It has nothing to do with ideology," said Mathis today, "It has to do with the day it appears and how it is placed."

The Times advertising department categorizd the Moveon's ad as an "advocacy" ad, and it doesn't matter which side of the political aisle you're on. It depends any number of factors that have to do whether the ad is in color or black&white and manner of placement.

Bill said that others who advertise in the Times are going to be up in arms to find out how Moveon.org. received the special rate.

All they have to do is contact the Times. They'll be glad to take your money and place your ad. If you want to leave the day and section placement a bit loose, you might get the same rate or better than MoveOn did.

Even you, Bill.

And you don't even have to crawl in bed with George Soros.

On Friday morning, even with the Times policy in front of him, Bill said that MoveOn received their discounted rate from the Times because "they are simpatico with MoveOn," and that the Times was then forced to give Giuliani the same rate. Simply Bill. Simple Bill.

BTW, Bill said his people can't get an answer from the Times. I made one call.

Spreading a story before he substantiates it. Some journalist.