Parroting MoveOn, Matthews Accuses Bush of 'Betrayal'

NewsBusters ^ | Mark Finkelstein

[governsleastgovernsbest]

In the wake of the odious MoveOn.org ad calling our commander in Iraq "General Betray Us," [read Dean Barnett's excellent take here] you might have thought the last thing a responsible member of the media would do would be to accuse other senior officials of "betrayal."

I did say "responsible." On this afternoon's "Hardball," Chris Matthews accused President Bush of "betrayal" for his handling of Iraq.

The "Hardball" host was fuming over Gen. Petraeus's reluctance to state whether the war in Iraq would make America safer.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: He couldn't say whether what we're doing in Iraq makes America safer or not. He couldn't say whether the lost lives, the misery, the hundreds of billions of dollars being spent are worth the effort in terms of our national security.

View video here.

Cut to a clip of Gen. Petraeus responding to a question from Sen. John Warner (R-Va.)

SEN. JOHN WARNER: Are you able to say at this time if we continue what you have laid before the Congress here as a strategy, do you feel that that is making America safer?

GEN. DAVID PETRAEUS: Sir, I believe this is indeed the best course of action to achieve our objectives in Iraq.

WARNER: Does that make America safer?

PETRAEUS: Sir, I don't know, actually. I've not sat down and sorted out in my own mind. What I have focused on and been riveted on is how to accomplish the mission of the Multi-National Force - Iraq.

Matthews went apoplectic.

MATTHEWS: This must be a first, an American field commander who can't say whether the sacrifices he's asking of his troops every day and night are worth it to their country. Did General Washington not know the answer in the American Revolution? Did General Eisenhower not know the answer in World War II? What are we doing in Iraq if the very man commanding the war doesn't know if it's doing us any good in terms of our national security? This is the real news of the [pronounced with contempt] so-called Petraeus Report. The general who won't tell how long it will take us to achieve the mission in Iraq can't tell us whether achieving that mission -- should it ever be achieved -- is worth it.

But it gets worse. The person who has to account for this policy of sending and keeping the American army in Iraq isn't some good soldier named Petraeus. It's the president who did the sending and the keeping. That the president continues to hide behind Petraeus, a man who admitted late this afternoon that he's given no thought to the Bush policy of fighting this war in Iraq, is not an acceptance of accountability, but a betrayal of it.

Surely Matthews was aware of the false analogy he had made between Gen. Petraeus and Generals Washington and Eisenhower. The latter were the supreme commanders of wars fought for the very creation and survival of the United States. For all its importance, the war in Iraq is different. As MNF-I commander, Petraeus is charged with a specific mission: accomplishing our nation's objectives in Iraq. As he stated, he is entirely focused on achieving that goal. He is not the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staffs, let alone the Secretary of Defense or the Commander-in-Chief.

And surely Matthews was acutely conscious of his choice of words. To have accused the President of the United States of "betrayal" in the poisonous atmosphere created by the MoveOn.org ad, was nothing less than reprehensible.

[uncbob]

Why does anyone post anything about Mathews

All it does is give him publicity

Don’t watch and don’t post

I would venture to say most of his audience are masochistic conservatives

[popdonnelly]

I’ve had about all I can take from these clowns, i.e., Chrissy and company. They have disgraced this country long enough.

[governsleastgovernsbest]

I understand the sentiment, but at NewsBusters our mission is exposing and combating liberal media bias.

[jveritas]

The TRAITORS who want the US defeated in this war and who are constantly providing aid and comfort to the enemy with their defeatism and their undermining of the war are accusing of treason the people of who are leading us to victory! These traitors are evil subhumans, they do not even rise to the level of humans.

[advertising guy]

one of these days,ole Chrissy will do an outside affair for his show and someone will say or hold a card putting him in his place. I cannot say what I really wish would happen

[bray]

I quit watching the Audio Version of the DNC website.

Pray for W and Our Troops

[popdonnelly]

Excuse me, but what right does this Democratic parrot have to accuse President Bush of “betrayal”. That’s an inflammatory word, and Matthews just throws it out. The man is irresponsible.

[Right Cal Gal]

I can’t figure out which I dislike more - him or Osama bin Olberman. I’ve emailed NBC that as long as Keith is on their Sunday night NFL broadcasts, I won’t be watching, much as I might love the matchup, Al Michaels and John Madden.

[advertising guy]

Olbermann is on in minutes.He surpassed Chrissy nationally,so he will yap too me thinks............

[RoadKingSE]

Chrissie is a bed wetting punk who would crap all over himself in the presense of live ordnance. He thinks he’s Edward R. Murrow because he smoked a Camel once while sitting outside talking to John Kerry about Christmas in Cambodia over double Arabian Mocha Sananis at Starbucks.

[advertising guy]

oh my God......Olbermann is blaming America and the Bush administration for 9/11

[2111USMC]

"We’ll look for Chris to acknowledge Gen. Petraeus’s statement tomorrow."

Yeah. Right. If you say so.

[Right Cal Gal]

I wish we’d get Olberman’s crap out on the internet and call for a boycott of Football Night in America until Olbermann is gone from the show. His moonbat friends won’t save his @$$ - they’re all watching PBS.

[Pikachu_Dad]

Unclean, unclean. Ick.

I clicked on his site. What a complete and total moron he is.

Now I need to go and wash my mouse.

[Enchante]

Yes, and Warner is an ASS too for asking that question. It was an attempt to drag General Petraeus into the domestic political debates, and it was NOT a military question. The WWII comparison would have been asking General Bradley to testify before Congress and say whether the Normandy invasion had already made us safer across the Atlantic while the battle was still ongoing..... or asking Admiral Nimitz whether invading Saipan had made us safer here in the USA. Not exact analogies, but close enough.... the commanders in theater are to be focused upon winning in relation to their specific tactical and strategic objectives, not upon debating political questions with Congress about whether a war is worth fighting at all and whether it is in fact “making us safer” at home.

[Enchante]

Chrissy Matthews is merely a contemptible leftist weasel, a slimy hack for the DNC and MoveOn.fraud

Either he knows he is making preposterous and dishonest comparisons, or else he is so incompetent that no should ever listen to him again. Either way, no one should ever listen to him again!

And to think that he’s the semi-rational one compared with the raving Olberdork.....