I already know from previous threads that you think it's OK to call those with different political viewpoints traitors. You should stop listening to Rush Limbaugh, he questions the patriotism of those who disagree with him, it's well documented. But he did respond to it http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rf6IxFWLqxY What does that tell you?

The fact is...She didn't know the name. The outcome is the same.

__________________
I've been informed....don't blame Bush, he's "not in control"
That must make him out of control

Well if her assesment is correct and Limbaugh is wrong that still doesn't make him a hypocrit. It would just mean his assesment of Hagel was incorrect. If you can show where Limbaugh has stated that no politician should ever be accused of betraying (or some such) and then accused Hagel of betraying (apparently his party) then I will cede your point.

It sounds like he was just spoofing the General Petraeus thing and then Shuster tried to twist it to do a gotcha against Blackburn.

NO. I never said it's OK to call people with different political viewpoints traitors. You can't win an argument by putting words in my mouth. I've only called one politician a traitor and that's John Kerry - the proof is in his own words.

I do believe you can question the patriotism of people if you have evidence that they do not put the country first. I gave examples. Take William Jefferson or Duke Cunningham - what's their primary objective? Are they patriotic?

That he didn't think it was particularly clever.

The fact is that he was gonna take his cheap shot whether or not she knew the name. If she had said a name, he would have said she was wrong. She made no claim to knowing the names of the soldiers in her district so how did he catch her? The interviewer is either an idiot or a LIAR. Take your pick.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

Let me get this straight; saying someone "betrayed us" is different then calling someone a traitor?

__________________
I've been informed....don't blame Bush, he's "not in control"
That must make him out of control

Yes. For one thing, who is the victim of the betrayal? If someone betrays the country, they are a traitor. On the other hand, questioning someones patriotism is not calling them a traitor. If I said you care more about your power than you do the country - not calling you a traitor. Being a traitor to your country requires actions which you know to be bad for your country. See? Merely being unpatriotic does not mean treasonous. Burning a flag is likely to be unpatriotic, IMO, but not treasonous. Seriously amepro, aren't you making a big leap when you assume questioning someone's patriotism is the same as calling them a traitor?

Kerry - traitor, guilty of treason, IMO.
Abu ghraib idiots - same thing.

Now when moveon accused Petraeus of betrayal, they were going after his sworn duty - to protect the Constitution and to his duty to his conscience, his family, his men, and his God. Hard to believe you're confused by this.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

My question:-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
12th wrote:
So you are saying yes, "betrayed us" and "traitor" can have two different meanings but can also mean the same thing. Therefore it depends on how you personally interpret it.Like giving away secrets or plotting and planning with the enemy. ...and you are saying that it's not a bad thing to question someone's patriotism right?From what I read, move-on thought General Petraeus cared more about power than country therefore they're questioning his patriotism right? It's sounds as if you're defending move-on.That means "move-on" is not calling General Petraeus a traitor.Yeah, you're saying move-on is only questioning General Petraeus patriotism but they are not calling him a traitor. If that's the case, why are the right wing pundits and politicians accusing "move-on" of calling General Petraeus a traitor?OK "unpatriotic" but not "treasonous."Well, according to your own personal assessment of the situation, the right wing pundits are making "a big leap" by making accusations against "move on" when all they did was question someone's patriotism.

__________________
I've been informed....don't blame Bush, he's "not in control"
That must make him out of control

Now when moveon accused Petraeus of betrayal, they were going after his sworn duty - to protect the Constitution and to his duty to his conscience, his family, his men, and his God. Hard to believe you're confused by this.

Now I know you're just baiting me. You know perfectly well what I mean. I know you're not dumb. You even agreed with me once, though you hate to admit it.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.

Have a nice evening 12th.

__________________
I've been informed....don't blame Bush, he's "not in control"
That must make him out of control

I you too, amepro.

__________________
Do you know what it's like to fall in the mud and get kicked... in the head... with an iron boot? Of course you don't, no one does. It never happens. It's a dumb question... skip it.