"Suggesting that our troops would attack the leaders of the very democracy they've sworn to sacrifice their lives for is an insult to their integrity, honor, and professionalism." [More]When we see this kind of blatant misdirection happening, let's all take a moment when we can to correct the record. Here's my comment (177):
"Suggesting that our troops would attack the leaders of the very democracy they've sworn to sacrifice their lives for is an insult to their integrity, honor, and professionalism."
Media Matters seems not to understand that accuracy matters. That oath is not to "sacrifice their lives" for "democracy," but to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic."
Big difference.
Google "Oath Keepers."
By promulgating that deception, Eric Burns is an insult to what is supposed to have been a watchdog, not a lapdog press.
Media Matters seems not to understand that accuracy matters. That oath is not to "sacrifice their lives" for "democracy," but to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic."
Big difference.
Google "Oath Keepers."
By promulgating that deception, Eric Burns is an insult to what is supposed to have been a watchdog, not a lapdog press.
Comment by David Codrea — May 10, 2009 @ 10:09 amFeel free to join the the fun. Maybe even explain how one could use "Nancy Pelosi" and "domestic enemy" in the same sentence...
Big difference.
Google "Oath Keepers."
By promulgating that deception, Eric Burns is an insult to what is supposed to have been a watchdog, not a lapdog press.
Comment by David Codrea — May 10, 2009 @ 10:09 amFeel free to join the the fun. Maybe even explain how one could use "Nancy Pelosi" and "domestic enemy" in the same sentence...