Army's Public Affairs Office Spreading Partisan Attacks On Obama

[populistdriven]

The Army's public affairs office publishes a daily roundup of Army-related news called "Stand To". Tuesday's edition contained the headline entry:

"Obama: World peace thru surrender."

Seriously? Have any of these people actually read the Obama defense policy papers or speeches -- or are they simply going on what they hear on Fox News and the Limbaugh network?

And more to the point, why is the Army's official in-house public affairs shop linking to this kind of stuff?

Tuesday's edition crosses the line. This isn't some citizen's blog or website. It's the in-house public affairs digest of the United States Army. It should not be amplifying partisan political attacks, nor should it be airing them at all.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/inteldump/2008/06/army_shows_its_colors.html

[PoliticalAmazon]

1. Pelosi should subpoena them to testify about using government funding for political purposes. n/t

[Dhalgren]

4. Pelosi? Subpoena? Who are you talking about?

That is funny! :rofl:

Stop! Stop! You're killin' me! :rofl:

[PoliticalAmazon]

5. Sorry. I forgot how accommodating she's been to the neocons for the last 8 years. n/t

[Captain Hilts]

2. I need to know more about this. This stinks! nt

[Dhalgren]

3. Come on, what did you expect?

After all, the Military is the "Military" in the "Military/Industrial Complex". They want wars (for some reason) and they don't like godless Liberals who want to stop them. Obama needs to get a message to the Generals, assuring them that he won't stop the war. Obama has said that he wants to reduce the number of troops in Iraq and increase the number in Afghanistan. Maybe the Generals (and corporations) could live with that. I don't like it, but then I don't count...

[Lasher]

6. The Stand-To link is not there.

OK. The WaPo article links to Tuesday's edition of Stand-To. So if you scroll down to the bottom on the right you will not find Obama: World peace thru surrender listed in the What's being said in blogs section. I guess Stand-To must have edited out that line. I think this Strategy Page article might be the one that was previously linked.

The Stragegy Page article seems pretty fair to me. The only thing propagandistic here is the way someone at Stand-To chose to describe it.

Edit: I was wrong about the Strategy Page article. The link in question pointed to this article at a blog called Knee Deep in the Hooah! It's pretty bad. Looks like Knee Deep in Hooey got some negative feedback and shut down comments to the Obama article. Apparently Stand-To got a cyber-earfull too.

[underpants]

7. They have sleeper cells in that office too apparently

we know about all the Regent U grads at Justice as well as others I am sure

Homeland Security is apparently another dumping ground