TELL US WHAT WE WANT TO HEAR!
On Monday, General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker testified before the U.S. House Armed Services Committee. Chairman Ike Skelton, (D-Mo), began the hearing by calling Petraeus a good friend and labeled him and Crocker “two of America’s finest.” Skelton is a rare commodity- a Democrat that supports a strong national defense. Of course, Ike represents a district with two large military bases, so it stands to reason he would be for the men and women in uniform, but that’s NOT indicative of his Democrat colleagues.

House Armed Services Committee ranking Republican Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) opened his remarks by letting Petraeus know that “the last week or so has been spent attacking your credibility, with major attacks here in the United States, some of them emanating from right here...” meaning some of the members on the Armed Services committee.
What Hunter was referring to was an ad that was in the New York Times on Monday that claims Petraeus was not going to give an objective, independent view of the situation on the ground. The ad ended with the tagline- “General Petraeus or General Betray us?” The ad was paid for by moveon.org, the liberal organization that has attacked the U.S. position on the war since its inception. They were big backers of John Kerry’s failed Presidential bid.

Sunday on ABC's “This Week,” moderator George Stephanopoulos, asked GOP presidential hopeful John McCain what he thought about the attacks on Petraeus' credibility. "I know this man, and many people know this general. He's not going to allow politicization of the dedication and service that not only he is providing, but the brave young men and women under his command." "He served his country with honor and distinction," the Senator from Arizona said, "and if we have to sink to that level to besmirch the reputation of a very fine and wonderful American, then I lament the level of dialogue. I hope that my Democrat friends will not be guided by moveon.org." But the members of the Democratic leadership are guided by moveon.org and their attacks by varying degrees.

Many Democrats were out in the media attacking Petraeus’ report it before he gave it.
For example, Senator Dianne Feinstein was asked Sunday on Fox about recent attacks on Petraeus' credibility. "Well, I don't think General Petraeus has an independent view in that sense," the Democrat from California said. "General Petraeus is there to succeed. He may say the progress is uneven. He may say it's substantial." "I don't know what he will say," Feinstein said. "You can be sure we'll listen to it. But I don't think he's an independent evaluator." The truth is none of us are “independent evaluators,” Senator. That's the reason this blog is called FAIR & BIASED!

Our life experiences, our station in life, and other various points of reference influence us. When someone states they can be totally objective, they are wrong because no one can be totally objective. Quite frankly the closest thing to complete objectivity is the leadership in the U.S. military. Historically, the top brass in the military has stayed non-partisan. Top-level officers are almost always registered as Independents to avoid any appearance of partisanship. They go out of their way to keep politics out of their job- even though they have to deal with politicians.
But Democrats know the Armed Forces vote Republican, and by a landslide. Due to our party's love of NATIONALISM and our historical support for a strong national defense, most soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines vote in droves for the GOP. That’s one of the reasons that Al Gore didn’t want the military vote counted in the 2000 election. He knew the military votes overwhelmingly for Republicans and by including it in the totals, “W” would benefit.

However, the military vote is classically impossible to predict during wartime. When you factor in the many and varied opinions held by everyone over our current war situation, it’s going to be interesting in 2008. The military will still vote Republican, but the margin may be thinner because of the war.

Petraeus gave a largely positive assessment of the much-debated troop surge but also said difficult tasks lie ahead. He said that he thought we could see withdrawal of up to 30,000 troops by July of 2008. Democrats didn’t like the report because he didn’t “tell them what they wanted to hear.” But Petraeus’ –like Joe Friday on Dragnet- just gave them the facts. Just because they don’t like the message, they should not attack the messenger. One good thing about the Dems response- it will move more of the military vote to the “R” column in 2008.