Oliver Willis: David Broder Libels Democrats (and Clark indiv.)

[Adelante]

David Broder, the most insider of Washington insiders, perpetuates a lie and smears the Democratic party in "reporting" on this past weekend's meeting of the DNC.

One of the losers in the weekend oratorical marathon was retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who repeatedly invoked the West Point motto of "Duty, Honor, Country," forgetting that few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military.

That's just a boldfaced lie by Broder, no two ways about it. I happened to be in attendance at the speech in question, just a stone's throw away from General Clark when he gave it. What David Broder is saying here is an absolute lie. The crowd in attendance stood on their feet, clapped their hands loudly and strongly time and time again when speakers - including Gen. Clark - invoked the service and sacrifice of America's fighting men and women.

In fact, in the very speech Broder cites as his reasoning for Democrats not supporting the military, Gen. Clark asked for a moment of silence (see the video here) to reflect on the sacrifices being made by the troops currently serving. The auditorium was silent, and many bowed their heads in prayer.

David Broder is a filthy liar, and the Washington Post ought to correct the slander he's published in their pages. For too long the Republican party and the conservative movement has smeared Democrats and liberals as not supportive of the troops, when time and time again it is the right who does not look out for their interests as Democrats and liberals time and time again fight for good foreign policy, veterans benefits, and the basics of body armor for our troops.

Again I say, David Broder is lying.

Oliver Willis: http://www.oliverwillis.com/2007/02/david_broder_li.html

Broder: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/05/AR2007020501250.html

[SpiralHawk]

1. corporate media lies -- par for the course

no honor, no respect, no news: corporate media

[NV1962]

38. Good grief: Tom Bevan responds, demanding equal opportunity outrage

What a #$%^& moron...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/realclearpolitics/20070206/cm_rcp/broders_moment_of_truth

Opinion
Broder's Moment of Truth?

David Broder has struck a nerve with the left over this comment in his column today on the Dems' recent winter meeting:

One of the losers in the weekend oratorical marathon was retired Gen. Wesley Clark, who repeatedly invoked the West Point motto of "Duty, Honor, Country," forgetting that few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military.

One of the commenters at the Washington Post calls Broder "a shill and a disgrace and a stain on humanity." Oliver Willis blasts Broder for being a "filthy liar" and calls on the Washington Post to "correct the slander he's published in their pages."

Of course, so far as I can tell from looking at his blog, Willis hasn't demonstrated any outrage over the real slander published in the Washington Post recently: William Arkin's unhinged diatribe against U.S. troops. Neither, for that matter, has any other major left wing blog that I'm aware of.

You BUSHISTA MORON - do you really argue that unless each and every Democrat jumps up in response to things like http://blog.washingtonpost.com/earlywarning/2007/02/post_11.html">the utterly sensible comments made by William Arkins biased liars can get away with character assassination of an ENTIRE PARTY!?

Tom Bevans, do real journalists and sensible columnists a favor: join David Broder and your moral carcinogenic ilk, and rot away in Hell.

[karynnj]

2. Did he miss that a large number of vets ran and won in 2006

almost all of whom were Democrats? You are right. This has to be fought because it is the whole basis of the view that Democrats are anti-military (which is different than anti-war) and thus are weak on national security. That is a legitamte theme for Clark, it was his life for decades - whether Broder likes it or not.

[Eurobabe]

3. Broder is a stinking old gasbag who needs to be put out to pasture

or euthanized.

[Auntie Bush]

13. Where he can slip on a patty, knock the gas out of him and break his neck.

That ought to take care of him!

Thanks for that post WesDem.

Wow! Were you lucky to be there!

[Adelante]

14. Oliver Willis was there, not me

Ugh, I guess that's not clear since I added the WaPo link.

[judy from nj]

4. I have heard Wes Clark say

that there he always sees a lot of veterans when he speaks at Democratic events, but when he went to a debate at a basically Republican event there were very few veterans there. Broder lost it long ago.

[dogman]

5. Broder would qualify for the Swiftboat Liar Hall of Fame.

The fact he cites Clark reveals to me they fear the Fighting Dems. It fits the meme the they will use to attack Dems for the no confidence vote against escalation.

[Dinger]

6. Not To Beat A Dead Horse, But

this really is but one indicator of the repukes real, blood-curdling fear of Clark. I have a feeling this will come back and haunt broder.

[TheModernTerrorist]

26. It's the crossover appeal

He's everything the Repuke voters would LOVE to see in a candidate, cept the big (D) in front of his name. The pukes are afraid he wil steal many votes from them, which is one of the many reasons why I plan on voting for him. And as much as I love and admire Gore, who has been an idol of mine for some time now, I may pull the Clark lever anyways...
...assuming both of them run, of course.

[Adelante]

7. Be sure to comment on the WaPo site

Let him hear from some Democrats!

[Apollo11]

8. Clark's speech to the DNC

I found it overly militaristic, but maybe that makes me anti-military? :eyes:

I want a civilian Commander in Chief (as the Constitution lays down). Not someone who says "I am a soldier".

I didn't see the relevance of the extended quote from General MacArthur - basically saying how glorious it is to fight and die for Uncle Sam. Very much in line with the idea of blindly following your commanders into battle.

Perhaps I am remembering his speech wrong. Does someone have a transcript?

If Clark can show us that he also understands "civilian values", he would make a fine Sec. of Defense.

[Adelante]

9. A civilian commander in chief has been good so far

Uh huh :eyes:

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. Why don't you reenforce Broder while you're at it?

Never mind, you already did. Do you live near UCLA? Wes Clark teaches there. In fact he just gave a lecture at their School of Law. He knows civilian values better than I do.

Wes Clark told a sickeningly harsh truth in his speech to the DNC. Our politicians took us into a war that never should have been fought while continuing tax cuts for the rich, and the only ones being asked to sacrifice are the young men and women serving in the military. I'll leave a link to the full transcript below.

Watch his theme as it develops in that speech:

"I get angry with an Administration that by condoning torture, using rendition, and these secret detention camps. By creating a sense of callous disregard for the innocent lives lost in that conflict, and by taking us to an unnecessary war in the first place has robbed our country of the legitimacy that is the birthright of every American and the source of our greatest power.



And I grow angry with elected officials who've dragged this country deeper and deeper into Iraq when there are so many other urgent problems abroad and at home.

And I ask, can't we do better?"


"... The course, right now we're hearing from every politician on this, even some of the war's staunchest supporters are admitting they were wrong. And others now call for poll-tested positions."


So let me ask you. Where is the equality in America when a woman still only makes seventy-seven cents on the dollar to a man?



Where's the justice where sergeants and colonels are punished for the abuse of prisoners but the political leaders and high-ranking lawyers who encouraged and perhaps directed it remain in office - exempt from accountability for the tragedies they unleashed.



Where's the balance when 46 million of our people lack basic health insurance and 36 million of our people, mostly children and the elderly, still live in poverty.



I'm a member of the business community now and I have to ask where's the fair play when CEO's have made billions of dollars from the increased productivity of American workers - but America's middle class and working families are struggling from paycheck to paycheck and some families can't earn a paycheck at all. Where's the fair play?



In the America I grew up in there was a sense of shared sacrifice. But where is it today with tax cuts during war that benefit the most those that need it least - while the sons and daughters of working families and the poor put on the uniform and march off to risk their lives for this country."


... I think we need a president who understands that to project strength and earn respect is to be strong and show respect. Not with a swagger but with a handshake. And to wear our military might not on our sleeve but tucked away in our back pocket."


As to the MacArthur quote, Clark prefaced it by saying that he doesn't agree politically with MacArthur, but MacArthur in the speech that Clark quoted from captured the essence of the loyalty to duty that allows soldiers to enter combat knowing that they may die for their nation any time they take the field. Our military doesn't pick it's fights, our civilian elected leadership does for them, and our military obeys their orders.

Have you ever studied Native American culture? Do you have any understanding of the role of a "Warrior" in those cultures? Lakota warriors would face battle with the expression "It is a good day to die". Did they want to die? No they did not, but they were willing to face that possiblility if that was what it took to defend their people. Crazy Horse's braves recited that phrase before fighting the battle of Little Big Horn against Custer. "It is a good day to die".

General Clark has been insturmental in fighting against the wars that this Administration enters and threatens to enter. He knows who will make the first sacrifices in a war that can not be prevented. He is tired of hollow yellow ribbon tributes to our fallen, while our corporate and political leaders pursue personal wealth and macho imagery, but not fairness and equality at home, and mutual interests and diplomacy abroad.

Clark followed his quote from MacArthur with this statement. Do you disagree with any of it?

"This year, as we struggle in Iraq, let's remember who we are as Americans and the ideals we represent. Let's commit to building the only memorial that can match the sacrifice that so many of our men and women have made - that's a stronger, safer, and more just America."

http://securingamerica.com/node/2197

[Apollo11]

17. Thanks for reminding me

about all the good parts of Wes Clark's speech to the DNC.

Maybe I should go watch it again at DNC.org

[Tom Rinaldo]

21. Your very welcome. And thanks for not at all being defensive about it. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

22. Maybe so.....

Clark didn't throw out the standard fare of red meat this time.....although he has made more publicily scathing comments about this administration for the past 5 years than all of the other candidates piled up together!

Read this:
http://www.rapidfire-silverbullets.com/2007/02/sandwiched_between_obama_edwar.html

[Jai4WKC08]

19. If you think civilians have better values than soldiers

Then yes, I'd say you're anti-military.

Please let me be clear. I say that NOT because you didn't care for the emphasis of Clark's speech -- some of us who love everything about Wes Clark didn't care for that speech. But to assume that those of us who spent our lives in the military are somehow not as good as the rest of you? Yeah, that's a pretty bigoted statement.

I also take exception that his speech was "militaristic." I think you're making a common misuse of the word which, in a political sense, means he was calling for "a strong military force and the will to use it aggressively." Clark may want a strong military, but he's no MIC hack -- his idea of a strong military is one filled with good people who are well trained, not more tanks, planes and ships. Moreover, he has always maintained, and did again on Friday, that military force should only be a LAST resort. He believes that Bush adventurism is breaking our military, not making it stronger.

That said, Clark emphasized his military background and I am SURE he had a reason for going that way, to that audience, with the TV cameras rolling. If you've heard any of his speeches around the country over the last year, this speech was totally out of character. It may be as simple as wanting the voting public to see the Democratic Party as having a strong base of support for the military, because Broder is hardly the only one saying we don't. And I think it worked to at least some effect, because as someone up-thread pointed out, Brian Jennings on NBC Nightly News reported that Clark brought the entire audience to silence in honor of the fallen.

[ieoeja]

36. And I think that poster has a problem with far more prominent bigotry.

You know: "military vets are better than those who never served".

Look at how the rightwingers (and DLC, but now I'm being redundant) spun Kerry's joke about Bush getting stuck in Iraq. EVERYONE with at least half a brain knew he was joking about Bush. But the usual suspects were able to twist what he said into an insult aimed at military service (nevermind he was raised in a military career family and his own two tours in 'Nam). Because you never, EVER insult the military in this country when running for office.

On the other hand, it is perfectly fair to suggest that your service somehow makes you superior to those who never served. It is done all the time.

Complaining about bigotry against vets is a bit like complaining about bigotry against white men. There is so little of the one compared to the reverse that the complaint really does sound whiney.

[Jai4WKC08]

42. There's a reason it's called "the service"

I don't know what you mean by "better." Obviously there are good and bad among all groups of people. But compared to say, business CEOs? TV news talking heads? Self-aggrandizing "pundits" like David Broder?

Or compared to assholes who wonder whether mere soldiers can aspire to "civilian values"?

Anytime you show me someone who risks their life, sacrifices time with their families, working long hours at back-breaking labor, often in lousy physical conditions, for very little pay, and they do it for some purpose greater then themselves... yeah, I'm going to give them the benefit of the doubt as to the type of person they are. And not just vets, but fireman, teachers, police, social workers. I am proud to have at one time counted myself among their number.

And let me tell you something else. If women like me hadn't joined the military and other "men only" professions back in the 1970s, women today wouldn't be half as far down the road to equality as we are. That's something else I'm proud to have been a part of.

And if either of those sound "whiney," tough shit.

[NV1962]

43. Hallmark Valentine card playing "Walking on Sunshine"? $4.99

But squealing "reverse bigotry" when confronted with the horrendous sight of people who actually worked for years on end for the benefit of their fellow citizens being applauded as superior citizens? Priceless.

You know, sloth is an assumable sin on the whole sum of society, among other shortcomings of character in a collective comprising human beings in all their glory. But it could be a problem when people start considering it a virtue.

[HootieMcBoob]

31. Wes Clark is a civillian n/t

[Eurobabe]

37. Clark understands civilian values more than most "civis" do

You obviously don't know much about Wes Clark. Suggest you learn, you'd be in for a refreshing surprise. -48

[blm]

10. Broder gets away with MORE SMEARING and lies against Democrats based on his

mythical 'status' when he is nothing more than a LYING SMEAR ARTIST posing as a REPORTER.

[Old and In the Way]

11. Broder is a Corsi, only higher up on the food chain.

Still a bottom feeder, though.

[Skwmom]

12. The Republicans will most likely nominate someone that the

American public can perceive as a commander-in-chief. The last thing they want to happen is for the Democrats to have a better commander-in-chief candidate.

[Auntie Bush]

15. That's going to be impossible for them to do when Wes becomes

a candidate. No one, including other Dem candidates would be perceived as a better commander-in-chief! Clark is heads and tails above everyone else.

[gratuitous]

18. Broder just mails it in

So much easier to submit stale, nonsensical talking points than to, you know, actually think before penning another 350 words and picking up that hefty paycheck. At this point, I surmise that Broder has paid some software geek $10,000 and come up with the Broder-o-Matic program. He just has to type in a few keywords (Clark, speech, Democratic, audience), and the software produces a Broder column that recycles all his old talking points.

Leaves more time for cocktail parties where all those glittering people tell him how great he is.

[FrenchieCat]

20. This is BoBB

A Bunch of Broder Bullshit which perpetuates a stereotype meant to reflect on the values of Democrats as, in essence, hating our troops.

What I think of this editorial: :hurts:

What I'm gonna do about it? Write a letter of protest.

And we need Democratic veterans to respond to this BoBB.
We had more veterans running than the GOP in 2006!

I'm writing to both Wes and Webb. The Scholar/Warriors will be kicking some ass on this very soon!

I'll also be writing a letter to VoteVet.

This will not stand! :patriot:

[NV1962]

23. I'm allergic to Broder

I mean, just take this for example:

The good news for the nation's Democrats is that neither of the supposed front-runners for the party's 2008 presidential nomination, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, stole the show when all 10 of the likely contenders spoke last weekend to the Democratic National Committee.

Clinton and Obama got good receptions from the crowd at the Washington Hilton, having filled many of the spectator seats with their young supporters. But they didn't blow away the field, which will help keep things loose for a while, allowing more grass-roots activists time to weigh the strengths and weaknesses of all the entrants.

My bold. So, now that we know that brave David Broder is our Lord and Protector, looking out for the point of view of us grass-roots activists, what is the "winner" of the DNC Wintermeeting, which is meant to present candidates to a larger audience, instead of offering yet another "contest" to the poll-crazed lemmings writing saddled with the tragic responsibility of filling column after column with uninvited lack of wisdom?

The stars of the weekend, judging from reactions in the ballroom and the lobby, were not Obama and Clinton but former Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina and Gov. Bill Richardson of New Mexico.

Oh my. So it turns out now that "grass-roots activists" is a codeword for hired groupies and Washington insiders. Feckless, classless, and viscerally anti-military. He'd make a good Bush supporter, if he wasn't so damn prone to pandering to whichever direction the wind blows.

More proof that the WaPo has become a temple for the worship of moral and intellectual cowardice.

[struggle4progress]

24. It's Rove's "We hit em where we're weak" tactic. Here's a useful link:

Who served in the military?
http://www.awolbush.com/whoserved.html

[venable]

25. Broder is an idiot

I'm not even a Clark supporter, but I am writing to him to call out this BS.

Very unfair to Clark, and clearly a lie.

[Jai4WKC08]

27. It was really more of a jab at Democrats

Than an indictment of Clark.

True, Broder was unfair and untruthful about how Clark was received. But his purpose was as much to attack Clark as to rehash the same old GOP lie that Democrats don't care about the sacrifices made by the troops and their families.

That's why all of us ought to be outraged, not just Clarkies. Thank you for recognizing as much.

[venable]

29. I agree that it was at all Democrats

in a number of ways, not the least of which it assumes incorrectly that Dems have anything against military people.

It also failed to recognize what the crowd recognizes which is that Clark is an eloquent anti-war voice.

It was pure BS. The guy should be fired. It was a flat out lie, and he knew it when he wrote it. Or he's just profoundly stupid, which also may be true.

[NV1962]

28. My letter to Broder:

Sir,

This unabashed and fiercely pro-military progressive is incensed by your assertion that "few in this particular audience have much experience with, or sympathy for, the military".

Your indictment may be couched in the philistine relativism of the word "few". But your overall suggestion that liberals don't have much experience with, or worse: affinity for the defenders of this nation is laughably false.

I invite you to peruse http://www.votevets.org/ instead of relying on hearsay proffered typically by chickenhawk couch potatoes, to acquaint yourself with the injurious nature of your misguided attempt at skewing "liberal leaning" supporters of robust progressive candidates, such as General Wesley K. Clark (US Army, ret.)

If you can't bring yourself to acknowledge that there are indeed many progressives out there who see a natural harmony in a strong military for and within a robust Democracy, at least refrain from further reading the minds and hears of what you also referred to as "grass-roots activists", as you've shown yourself to be as much out of step with reality, as out of line.

Sincerely,


(name)

(Crap, I just noticed I typed "minds and hears" instead of "minds and hearts"... That should teach me to write letters when I'm angry!)

[venable]

30. excellent letter n/t

[Cassandra]

32. The comments to the op-ed are scathing.

Willis did good service picking up on that part of a dismal commentary.

[oasis]

33. Broder should retire already. Half-baked hack.(eom)

[CarolNYC]

34. AMERICAblog

John at AMERICAblog posts this:

From where did he pull that bullshit argument? He says he was at the DNC meeting this weekend, and I guess he could just tell by all the "kill the military" buttons we were all wearing (we had them pinned to our "I work for Satan" t-shirts).

I was at the DNC meeting this past weekend, and unlike David Broder, it wasn't clear to me at all that the overwhelming majority of the audience had "no sympathy" for the military. In fact, General Clark was MOBBED the entire time he was there. I was due to interview him, and it took a good 20 minutes for him to walk 20 feet to our camera because the crowd wouldn't leave him alone. And not because they didn't feel any "empathy" for him. They loved him.

More here:
http://americablog.blogspot.com/2007/02/david-broder-says-dems-dont-like.html

I like that...'Clark was MOBBED'. Cool...

And the "kill the military" pins on the "I work for Satan" shirts. :rofl:

Broder, on the other hand, is an embarrassment, at the very least.

[depakid]

35. He works for the Post, so what does anyone expect?

Honesty? Integrity?

LOL.

The Post has none of those qualities. It shares more in common with Pravda (or a tabloid) these days than with a semi-credible mainstream paper.

[JNelson6563]

39. Here's something we can all agree on

Broder is a piece of shit. :toast:

He's lucky Clark is too classy to kick his whiney ass.

Julie

[roguevalley]

40. he needs to be email bombed with rebuttals, the fucking idiot.

perhaps a few thousand emails with sign up sheets for the military for him and the rest of the chickens in his family and circle of friends. if they support them more, enlist. enlist or shut up.

[Donna Zen]

41. Broder live

David Broder spoke at my daughter's graduation. His message to all assembled was this: the Babyboomers are at fault for everything that is wrong in America. Babyboomers questioning the president are just plain bad because it would be better if they would just shut up and sit down. The solution to everything would be mild and cuddly non-boomers who would grovel at bush's feet.

During the post-graduation photos, between the squeals and smiles, the graduates all agreed that Broder was a fucking idiot. They said that; they said "Fuck David Broder."

Which brings us to today: Broder is a proven idiot Swiftboater who wishes the Democratic ill. (snark)Don't make any waves Democrats, just keep smiling while Broder calls us anti-military, and be sure and keep your powder dry. (/snark)

[Leilani]

44. Now up to 9 pages of angry replies to Broder

Years ago he made some sense.

Today he's one of the worst "Inside the Beltway" types.

He really doesn't have a clue.