First time visitor? Learn more.

Walter Cronkite, dead at age 92…Hasta la vista, Wally

by Bob in Breckenridge ( 123 Comments › )
Filed under Media at July 17th, 2009 - 11:15 pm

Cry me a river, the America-hating POS finally bit the dust. For those you who might not be aware, Cronkite is the asshole CBS anchorman who claimed the Viet Nam war was lost, even as we were winning it. He said on his newscast in 1968 that we lost the Tet Offensive. We did not lose it, and as a matter of fact, we won it, rather easily.
The liberal asswipe turned the American people against the war, and as I said before, even as we were winning it, by lying about what was happening in Viet Nam, and he alone was responsible for us losing the only war we ever lost. That led to the death of 3 miillion Cambodians by Pol Pot’s henchmen.
So as you see pieces of liberal shit like Chrissie Matthews, Keith Uberlady, Katie Couric, Charlie Gibson and Brian Williams, thank Cronkite for teaching them all how to be America-hating a-holes.
So Walter, burn in hell, you worthless POS…

Update: Escovado noticed the washed up ukulele player put up a “Cronkite is dead” thread on LGF 1.0, but only for “nice” comments. I can’t wait to see what that POS Nancy does when Charles Manson dies. A thread for nice comments only?

Update, part deux: I see my post has become quite the “controversy”. So be it. I stand by everything I posted earlier. Again, I’ll explain my hatred of Cronkite: He and his lackeys turned the American people against the war by outright lying and obfuscating. You have to remember that in the 60′s there was no alternative media to balance the liberal lies the media reported as “news” each night and in most papers everyday.

Looking back now it’s easy to see exactly what their goal was, and it’s no different than what the goal of liberals is today. It is that America is way too powerful, and needs to be taken down, which is why scumbags like Obama go around the world apologizing for our “arrogance”, and hope to “even the playing field”.

Of course the asshole POTUS forgets that it was the U.S.A. that stood up to the U.S.S.R. and their goal of communist world domination and finally defeated them, thanks to Ronald Reagan, who did it with zero help from the libs, and as a matter of fact, Ted Kennedy was collaborating with the USSR in trying to take down Reagan.

If we had won in Viet Nam, and the NVA senior officers and generals even said we were winning easily, millions of people would not have been slaughtered. I stand by every word I said in my original post about Cronkite.


Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

123 Responses to “Walter Cronkite, dead at age 92…Hasta la vista, Wally”
( jump to bottom )

  1. Bordm
    1 | July 17, 2009 11:51 pm

    Yeah, Walter Concrete (intentional) did the kind of damage that all willful traitors wish they could accomplish. He was the gold standard for intentionally betraying your country with malice and aforethought.

  2. 2 | July 17, 2009 11:52 pm

    No argument here. he supported the NVA/VC who were enemies of America. he opened the path of the progressive movement.

  3. 3 | July 17, 2009 11:58 pm

    I wouldn’t be shocked if Walter is a Muzzie Lover.

  4. sk
    4 | July 18, 2009 12:12 am

    While I couldn’t agree more with all the condemnation of Cronkite--he really was largely responsible for the diseased journalists of today--it simply isn’t true that he turned Americans against the Vietnam War. What turned them against that war was the increasing American body count. This is what the data show. The body count resulted, in turn, because the US did not prosecute the war very effectively, except, perhaps, near the end.

    Don’t get me wrong. What has happened since that war has been powerfully affected by what Cronkite helped create, but that is not the issue.

    I can dig up the relevant statistical analyses to back up my claim about the importance of the body count, if that becomes necessary.

  5. jakee308
    5 | July 18, 2009 1:20 am

    re: #4 by sk

    The body count made them sensitive to the ongoing drumbeat coming at them about how the war was being lost and/or being fought wrongly (true but not in the way that was put forward), that we shouldn’t have been there in the first place or that those we were fighting for were not holding up their end.

    Cronkite’s (seemingly) off the cuff remarks during a broadcast to a nation that had few other outlets for information were devastating. Cronkite had a deserved rep from WWII for accurate reporting. He was considered by most of the viewing public of any political stripe as being a JOURNALIST; one who investigated and gathered varied sources of fact and narrative and presented it in an encapsulated form for the viewing public. His words were taken as “cast in gold” and an honest, unbiased report.
    I believed at the time that he was merely confused by the type of fighting in Viet Nam as it was foreign to his experience in WWII and Korea. Later, after he retired, He proved himself to be the archtype of the biased, manipulative, agenda driven ideologue who should never be allowed to submit reports as facts. (think of Rather who was selected to replace him when he retired).
    I believe he retired because HE thought his reputation was damaged by his live outburst during his newscast. It would prove later that he was the tip of the Iceberg forming in the profession of Journalism.

    I submit that regardless of the statistics, Walter Cronkite betrayed his profession, the people of the U.S. and the soldiers who DEFEATED the Viet Cong during TET. He deserves a place alongside Benedict Arnold as a traitor and indirect murderer.


    sk, I ask how old you are. I ask because if you didn’t live then as an adult then you are making your evaluation using statistics and quite possibly the opinions of those who are biased to draw your conclusion. If you weren’t there, you would not know about how what he said affected the Nation. It was a fist to the gut to the nation and everyone felt it. These days you cannot understand what it was like to have only 3 outlets for national news. A good way to understand it would be to take the national reaction to some of the stranger plot twists of the more popular tv/cable shows. They’re talked about around water coolers and at hot dog stands by even people who don’t know each other. You would have to have experienced the mood of this nation after Walter’s out burst on national tv to understand the impact.

  6. 6 | July 18, 2009 5:11 am

    Harumph harumph harumph how DAAAAAARE you say such a thing about an American icon like Walter Cronkite?!?!?!?!

    Just kidding.

    Actually, I agree. Cronkite was no hero. The guy was just another waste of skin left-wing journalist with a vested interest in using his position as a journalist to act like a termite to weaken the United States of America. Guy was a lying scumbag, and America is really not a bit worse off without him.

    I’m sure the over-80 crowd is crying in their denture cream right now, but I’m not.

  7. no2liberals
    7 | July 18, 2009 5:11 am

    re: #4 by sk
    I was actually watching his show when he made his defeatist announcement, and I can tell you, it sent an electric shock from the base of my skull to my feet.
    I already had friends killed in Viet Nam, at that time, with others serving, and my oldest brother had orders to go, several months after Tet.
    His betrayal of this nation, irrespective of what he believed, was unacceptable, then and now.
    Ever since, the reporters that have come along, view his impact on the growing anti-war movement as a professional duty, and a road to fame.
    Add to that his moonbattery in the years since that declaration of defeat.
    I’m sure his family is in mourning, and I feel sympathy for them, but not for him.

  8. davehm
    8 | July 18, 2009 6:34 am

    I’ve always understood Wally to be a lefty but I have to admit I never watched him.

  9. RickMZ
    9 | July 18, 2009 8:00 am

    While getting my bagel this morning, I saw a NYTimes above the fold headline that made me gag: Walter Cronkite, 92, Dies; Trusted Voice of TV News

    Yeah, “trusted” alright. I trusted him to be wrong all the time, and I was so rarely disappointed. Fuck ‘im.

    I wonder how long the slobbering over his death will go on.

  10. 10 | July 18, 2009 8:03 am

    re: #9 by RickMZ

    Consider the source.

    He’s a trusted source just as much as they are.

    The REAL question is….. why in the hell were you reading the new york times?

  11. 11 | July 18, 2009 8:04 am

    re: #7 by no2liberals

    The enemy had admitted that they lost and were crushed, but it was the anti-american journalism that gave them the morale to win.

    THAT, in and of itself, should have been evidence required for cases of treason.

  12. RickMZ
    12 | July 18, 2009 8:07 am

    re: #10 by LanceKates

    Hey now! Don’t insult me. I was buying a bagel (they have a small newsrack) and I just scanned the front page. I didn’t read the damned thing. Hell, I didn’t even touch it.

  13. 13 | July 18, 2009 8:11 am

    re: #12 by RickMZ

    heh, ok, we’ll let it slide THIS time……….


    I used to read the Wall Street Journal, that’s probably the last newspaper I read regularly.

    The local paper is an odd thing. Radically liberal, but the back page of the main section always has an article by Krauthammer or another noted conservative and even includes a “Prayer of the Day”

    I stopped getting it though. My credit card changed and they called me to get the new number. I asked her to send me a bill (I don’t update credit card information over the phone if you’ve called me as it is the number 1 way to get your identity stolen) and her reply was “well, it may not get there in time, you don’t want to STOP receiving the paper, do you?” (Kind of rudely)

    I told her “You know what, yeah, I guess I do. Print is dead.” then hung up.

  14. 14 | July 18, 2009 8:32 am

    13 Charles 7/17/09 5:33:55 pm
    Most LGF readers don’t need to be told this, but please note that any mean-spirited comments about Cronkite will be deleted. If you can’t restrain yourself from venting anger, do it somewhere else.

    Please don’t wish me into the cornfield, Anthony!

    During the Viet Nam war, Walter Cronkite emboldened our enemies and demoralized our troops. He betrayed the American people by deliberately misleading them about our progress in ‘Nam.

    Left-wing, MSM propagandists like Cronkite are the reason why blogs, talk radio and other alternative media have become so popular. The passing of Cronkite means there is one less America-hating media icon in the world. Pardon me if I don’t shed any tears.

  15. BuddyG
    15 | July 18, 2009 8:49 am

    Does this mean we’ll finally stop hearing about Michael Jackson now ?

    Hope so

  16. 16 | July 18, 2009 9:11 am

    re: #15 by BuddyG

    Hey, I saw Michael Jackson my local Denny’s restaurant this morning. He was eating with Elvis.

  17. 17 | July 18, 2009 9:13 am

    Cronkite’s death is being treated with reverence by LGF 1.0 They are a liberal blog now. Here is Charles Johnson’s comment:

    Most LGF readers don’t need to be told this, but please note that any mean-spirited comments about Cronkite will be deleted. If you can’t restrain yourself from venting anger, do it somewhere else.

    You see this is what is important, not that this man helped insure the death of millions, but that we talk nice about the asshole.

  18. 18 | July 18, 2009 9:14 am

    Escovado and I are great minds!

  19. RickMZ
    19 | July 18, 2009 9:25 am

    venting anger

    So now telling the truth about Uncle Walter, and calling him the treasonous bastard he was, is considered ‘venting anger’.

    I’m sure when Ted the Swimmer sinks for the last time, CJ will post the same thing. ‘Venting anger’ will include calling The Swimmer a psychopathic murdering bastard. (And no, I do not want to hear about ‘manslaughter’; The Swimmer ran away to the safety of a nap to sleep off the booze while leaving Mary Jo to drown. That’s murder in my book.)

  20. jakee308
    20 | July 18, 2009 9:33 am

    re: #14 by Escovado

    Ah Hah! I believe I see the significance of your Avatar.

    Yes, I see it now. Charles is Anthony; who wishes anyone WHO DISAGREES WITH HIM OR MAKES HIM ANGRY whisked away into the cornfield(banned). Very nicely done! Bravo. Plus it highlights the childishness of such actions and thus the immaturity of someone who acts as if his actions are normal. (even though his nuttiness is commonly spoken of by other bloggers and commenters elsewhere.)

    As one who still occasionally (very rarely these days) comments over there, I’m reminded of what it feels like in “indian country” where you’re not sure where or how many of the enemy there are and an attack could come at any minute with little or no warning that one has strayed into an ambush. Of course for those who are “children of the corn” (to mix up movie with tv) don’t have to worry because they are “true believers” and know the line to toe.

  21. jakee308
    21 | July 18, 2009 9:38 am

    re: #19 by RickMZ

    In my opinion, Ted Kennedy is a coward, a liar, a murderer, a thief, a drunkard, a philanderer, a fraud and an elitist. Thus he represents the epitome of all that being a liberal Democrat really means.

    That he is a Senator of the United States Congress should fill his fellow Senators with shame. That they are not is an indication of the depths to which they have sunk.

  22. jakee308
    22 | July 18, 2009 9:43 am

    Just realized that Mary Jo Kopechne died on this day 40 years ago.

    I must have been channeling her up thread.

    May G-d rest her soul and may G-d punish Ted Kennedy for her murder.

  23. jakee308
    23 | July 18, 2009 9:50 am

    (a laundered page at Wiki)
    Mary Jo Kopechne

    The Examiner hints at the culpability of “Fat Teddy” Kennedy and his phony story.

  24. 24 | July 18, 2009 9:52 am

    Your post might be closer to the truth than you realize Bob:

    From Wikipedia:

    Cronkite contrasted his support for accountable global government with the opposition to it by politically active Christian fundamentalists in the United States:[42]

    “Even as with the American rejection of the League of Nations, our failure to live up to our obligations to the United Nations is led by a handful of willful senators who choose to pursue their narrow, selfish political objectives at the cost of our nation’s conscience.They pander to and are supported by the Christian Coalition and the rest of the religious right wing. Their leader, Pat Robertson, has written that we should have a world government but only when the messiah arrives. Any attempt to achieve world order before that time must be the work of the Devil! Well join me… I’m glad to sit here at the right hand of Satan.”

  25. 25 | July 18, 2009 9:52 am

    The man truly was a piece of work:

    In 2003, Cronkite, who owned property on Martha’s Vineyard,[5] became involved in a long-running debate over his opposition to the construction of a wind farm in that area. In his column, he repeatedly condemned President George W. Bush and the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Cronkite appeared in the 2004 Robert Greenwald film Outfoxed, where he offered commentary on what he said were unethical and overtly political practices at the Fox News Channel. Cronkite remarked that when Fox News was founded by Rupert Murdoch, “it was intended to be a conservative organization — beyond that; a far-right-wing organization”. In January 2006, during a press conference to promote the PBS documentary about his career, Cronkite said that he felt the same way about America’s presence in Iraq as he had about their presence in Vietnam in 1968 and that he felt America should recall its troops.[43]

    Cronkite spoke out against the War on Drugs in support of the Drug Policy Alliance, writing a fundraising letter and appearing in advertisements on behalf of the DPA.[44] In the letter, Cronkite wrote: “Today, our nation is fighting two wars: one abroad and one at home. While the war in Iraq is in the headlines, the other war is still being fought on our own streets. Its casualties are the wasted lives of our own citizens. I am speaking of the war on drugs. And I cannot help but wonder how many more lives, and how much more money, will be wasted before another Robert McNamara admits what is plain for all to see: the war on drugs is a failure.”[4

  26. Bob in Breckenridge
    26 | July 18, 2009 10:05 am

    re: #17 by Jehu

    Nancy Johnson is liberal PUSSY. F him and the POS losers that continually post on that leftist blog LGF 1.0.

  27. wright1
    27 | July 18, 2009 10:43 am

    To declare Walter Cronkite as biased and an ideologue is fair comment -- the characterization you used is way past the line. Before you write things like wishing someone “burn in hell”, consider for a moment a slightly more measured approach. Because at the end of making such a statement, other than venting, how has that advanced the discourse and more importantly how has that helped you beat witness to some higher themes like Mercy and Humility?

    I am not a fan of how LGF 1.0 shuts down posts like yours but if you are going to exude vitriol, there does exist fair comment of your diatribe.

  28. Cuffy Miegs
    28 | July 18, 2009 10:50 am

    Cronkite was a loyal member of the Leftist intelligensia, and avidly supported the aspirations of liberals to become a new aristocratic ruling class in the US and around the world -- the “nobless oblige” he ridiculed conservatives for not accepting and bowing to. He will therefore be lauded in the MSM for his contributions to that end, and the events of his life will be celebrated.

    For those of us who are not as fond of our new aristocracy as he, Cronkite’s passing is much less upsetting. But I’d just as soon not speak badly of the dead. I’d just as soon do the same for the expected barrage about Cronkite that I did for Michael Jackson -- let his fans have their fun, and otherwise ignore the hoopla.

  29. 29 | July 18, 2009 10:58 am

    re: #27 by wright1

    Um…yes…”Burn in hell” is a wee bit over the top.

  30. 30 | July 18, 2009 11:07 am

    re: #20 by jakee308

    Ah Hah! I believe I see the significance of your Avatar.

    You have now been allowed into the inner sanctum.

    Remember to keep thinking happy thoughts!

  31. 31 | July 18, 2009 11:35 am

    Already 12 deletions on Nancy’s site. Poor boy, his “delete” finger is gonna get blistered.

    Geez, his front page is particularly rancid today.

    Oh, and good riddance Walter.

  32. jakee308
    32 | July 18, 2009 11:46 am

    re: #27 by wright1

    OH, I’ve gone over the line? whose line? I’m not allowed to express my opinion but you feel you have the right to judge me? Where’s the vitriol? I expressed my hope for what I believe his judgment should be. He betrayed the trust and faith of millions of people. Indirectly contributed to the agony of the war and in later years turned out to be a virulent anti-christian.

    BITE ME.

    Go back to 1.0 where you’ll feel more comfortable with repressed opinions and a censorious controlling dictator (traits you yourself probably show).

    P.S. when you censure me, get my sentiments correct; I said “Rot in hell”. Not “burn in hell”.

    Oh, sorry, I guess you weren’t speaking directly to me but my answer for bob is still the same.

  33. no2liberals
    33 | July 18, 2009 11:49 am

    Bill Shakespeare sends his regards to Wallie.

    Idol of idiot-worshippers!

  34. jakee308
    34 | July 18, 2009 12:12 pm

    BTW, folks like wright1 frost my a$$.

    We are treated by the other party as pariahs and criminals. They have no qualms about shaking our hands whilst preparing to stab us in the back. Some of the more egregious things that Reps have been castigated and jeered for were engineered by the other party and were acquiesced by us as we were convinced it was for the good of the country. We still compromise too much with these vultures. I’m tired of Rep Sens and Reps talking about “their friends on the other side” WE DON’T HAVE ANY FRIENDS ON THE OTHER SIDE.!@!!!!!! Individuals may be friendly but to think that the other side is somehow our “friend” is ludicrous and is played upon by the other side all the time.

    Like the sundance kid said “there ain’t no rules in a knife fight”. Well politics these days is a knife fight. They’ve chosen this when they lost power in ’94 after being in for 40 years. They then vowed to get back in power no matter what it took and they did it. With the help of a “good old boy” maverick a$$hole who was more honorable to the other side than the side he said he was a part of. His daughter kinda demonstrates what passes for thought in his family.

    I for one have taken the gloves off as far as liberals are concerned. They are to be treated like rabid animals — destroyed as soon as they reveal their inner insanity. No mercy, no forgiveness, no “can’t we just all get along”. The left/liberals are insane and are self-declared traitors to this country and are anti-democracy and anti-freedom and anti-capitalist. They need to be finally reduced to the minority they deserve. They have NEVER had a firm grasp on reality they have always sought to achieve a Utopian dream. Whenever any group or person pursues a Utopian dream the end result is always tyranny and death.

    So wright1, man up, grow up and worry less about harsh words and more concern about insane idiots dictating how the country spends it’s money and how we get our health care.

  35. 35 | July 18, 2009 12:18 pm

    re: #29 by Escovado

    Um…yes…”Burn in hell” is a wee bit over the top.

    I agree. This sort of statement comes from somebody with an insufficiently expansive understanding of what hell actually is, and how long eternity is. I wouldn’t wish it on ANYBODY.

    For the record, my agreement in #6 is with the general tenor that Walter Cronkite was a Leftist traitor and termite who undermined American morale. It should not be taken as agreement with every last thing said in the post.

  36. jakee308
    36 | July 18, 2009 12:24 pm

    Also, where does all this respect for the dead come from? They’re not in a position to do anything about it and when we’re dead we won’t be too concerned about what’s being said about us.

    Seems to be a little superstitious to me.

    Whether I’m dead or alive, please feel free to contradict, argue or just plain castigate me. (profanity and vitriol are ok).

    Of course I’ll feel free to return what was said in an equal and opposite manner to any disagreement or ill-wishes.

    (that being said, I wouldn’t go to someone’s funeral and start bad mouthing them and that’s not the case with what I’ve said here.)

  37. Richard Romano
    37 | July 18, 2009 12:53 pm

    Cronkite was an irresponsible journalist, and he paved the way for others to follow in his stead, to our great peril.

    Having said that, he was nonetheless an icon of journalism. We can certainly celebrate the good things he brought to the profession, while detesting the bad things.

    My condolences to his family and friends.

  38. RickMZ
    38 | July 18, 2009 1:09 pm

    re: #36 by jakee308

    Whether I’m dead or alive, please feel free to contradict, argue or just plain castigate me. (profanity and vitriol are ok).

    Are you f*ckin’ nuts? Why would I castigate you for stating very plain that with which I agree? With all the raping and pillaging going on right now in this country, harsh words are the least of my worries.

    These loonies are tilting at Climate Change windmills — with my money! F*ck ‘em all. Using knives, bats, whatever.

    I honestly don’t think most people in this country know the extent of the corruption and malfeasance going on in our Government. The Fellatio Media see to that. I think most people would be damned pissed off if they knew the House voted on the 1,300 page Cap ‘n Tax bill without even reading the damn thing!

    All the things the libtards manufactured against Bush is happening for real right now with Obama. Once that dirty little secret gets out, the feces is going to hit the whirring, oscillating blades. And the feces will fly everywhere.

    I have one hope for Obama: I truly hope he is the first former president who has to seek political asylum in some other country once he leaves -- or is forced out of -- office. I really mean that. I want Me-chelle to be proud of her country by us throwing her tyrant husband outta here. That’s my dream. Because I have judged Obama by the content of his character, and not only found it pathetically wanting, but find it treasonous. A president with no records made public. Amazing. The only way the breakthrough will come, though, is when people see their reality as opposed to the slobbering picture painted of the sainted Obama by the Fellatio Media. When that happens, the anger will not only be directed at our slimeball aristocratic politicians, but also the media elites, as well.

  39. RickMZ
    39 | July 18, 2009 1:13 pm

    re: #37 by Richard Romano

    We can certainly celebrate the good things [Cronkite] brought to the profession . . .

    Please feel free to elaborate.

  40. 40 | July 18, 2009 1:39 pm

    jakee308, the idea of respect for the dead stems from the fact that they can’t defend themselves against accusations. To put it simply, it’s just not fair to wish things on someone who can’t defend themselves.

    This doesn’t mean we can’t point out the facts about his life, it just means that you can’t make crap up and hope for bad things to happen. God alone will deal with him now.

  41. Speranza
    41 | July 18, 2009 1:43 pm

    Cronkite always a liberal, became increasingly loony leftist with a taste for conspiracy theories (“Osama Bin Laden has been taken prisoner and Bush will announce his capture right before the elections”) over the years, and I never really cared for him (Frank Reynolds, Howard K. Smith, David Brinkley, and Chet Huntley were better in my opinion). Still, he did not cause us to lose that war, LBJ did by tying our military’s hands.

  42. sk
    42 | July 18, 2009 2:54 pm

    re: #5 by jakee308

    The body count made them sensitive to the ongoing drumbeat coming at them about how the war was being lost and/or being fought wrongly (true but not in the way that was put forward), that we shouldn’t have been there in the first place or that those we were fighting for were not holding up their end.

    jakee308, I don’t disagree at all. In fact, I like the way you put it. I do think, though, that we conservatives need to think carefully about our political projects (including wars) before we go off half-cocked. The problem in Vietnam, of course, was that neither LBJ nor Nixon was a conservative, that Nixon was, unfortunately, a Republican, and that he was also forced to resign. That does create certain facts on the ground.

    As for my age, let’s call that “personal information.” But I’ll tell you that my opinion is based on scientifically sound analysis. As I happen to agree with you, perhaps that analysis has been given additional credibility.

    no2liberals, see my response to jakee308.

    As for all the complaints about speaking ill of the dead, my response would be that Dante wrote some very famous nasty things about the dead, including dead Popes. I see no reason to be more virtuous than he.

  43. iam7545
    43 | July 18, 2009 3:10 pm

    This post is in very poor taste.


  44. 44 | July 18, 2009 3:17 pm

    Oh, now thats a better typeface, hands down.

  45. iam7545
    45 | July 18, 2009 3:26 pm

    As for all the complaints about speaking ill of the dead, my response would be that Dante wrote some very famous nasty things about the dead, including dead Popes. I see no reason to be more virtuous than he.

    Errrrrr -- wait until he is buried.

    This post should be removed

  46. jakee308
    46 | July 18, 2009 3:52 pm

    re: #42 by sk

    We were in Viet Nam for honorable reasons. (A policy that Truman began in Greece). We wrongly assisted an attempt by Fwance to regain their colonial power then when they LOST, we brokered a peace through division of the country a la the Korean division. We left advisors and observers in place to help keep the communists (clients of Russia) and the Catholics from killing each other.

    Kennedy raised the number of troops (contrary to popular myth) and set up the conditions that became ripe in the 60′s.

    Johnson (having dishonestly branded Goldwater as a warmonger) fearing being labeled weak on defense took a fiasco of malfeasance and misfeasance by two USN Vessels in the Gulf of Tonkin and used it as an excuse to expand his war powers. (I had conversations with crew on one of the vessels involved. Let’s just say that the skippers of both ships should have faced courts martial and at least been relieved of command. Some will say it was planned by LBJ but I say NO. He used the incident for his own purposes)

    He and his policy wonks (rot in hell also Mr. McNamara) decided it was too risky to mine Haiphong harbor (they were afraid of the Chinese who have a huge air force and naval base on Hainan Island which sits at the eastern edge of the Gulf of Tonkin) and believed that full, all out aerial bombing would also bring China into the conflict.(they were already there, supplying the North along with Russia). As a result, the White House issued the daily flight orders (the bomb loads, the targets, the rules of engagement) thus tying the hands of the commanders in the field/at sea and increasing the risk and therefore the likelihood of increased casualties.

    It got worse from there. Even so, we were winning. In fact we were doing so well, that the Viet Cong was forced to expend all their available assets in the South during TET in a last ditch attempt to stem the tide of the U.S. Armed Forces. They did a lot of superficial damage but permanently destroyed their assets and their ability to continue the fight against the U.S. and disillusioned their supporters in the North. (a perfect example of a Pyrrhic Victory).

    The majority of the public was not anti-war but they needed to see more being done and being done by the folks we were dying for. All they saw/heard was the negative. (Think of how the Iraq war was reported until our troops started to win.) That’s how it was reported on TV. Daily body counts and all the blood that the TV people could get on the screen. They also showed the coffins coming back. (no choice by the family whether they could take those pictures or not)

    Cronkite’s visible dismay during TET and his criticism after, broke the morale of the American people.

  47. jakee308
    47 | July 18, 2009 3:54 pm

    re: #45 by iam7545

    We don’t do that here. Go to LGF 1.0 if you like being in an echo chamber or the soft cushion of comfort from the predictable and uncontroversial.

  48. jakee308
    48 | July 18, 2009 3:57 pm

    re: #42 by sk

    I was under the impression that you came to the conclusion that Cronkite had little effect and that America got out of Viet Nam because of the casualties. So I don’t see us agreeing on that.

  49. iam7545
    49 | July 18, 2009 3:59 pm

    jakee -- apparently you dont know me so chill.

    This post lacks class and serves no purpose at this time.

    I know most of the bloggers here- I will likely not be back.

    Childish bullshit

  50. Bob in Breckenridge
    50 | July 18, 2009 4:01 pm

    re: #29 by Escovado

    Okay, sorry. Burn in heck.

  51. Bob in Breckenridge
    51 | July 18, 2009 4:02 pm

    re: #49 by iam7545

    Don’t let the “door” hit on the ass on your way out.

  52. Bob in Breckenridge
    52 | July 18, 2009 4:08 pm

    re: #49 by iam7545

    BTW, IMO Cronkite is no different than Hanoi Jane.

    Take a trip to your local VFW and talk to the ‘Nam vets about Cronkite and ask what they think of him. Maybe not all hate the POS, but most at our VFW do.

  53. 53 | July 18, 2009 4:18 pm

    re: #52 by Bob in Breckenridge

    Don’t get me going on Hanoi Jane. Now there’s someone I might be happy to say ‘Burn in hell.’ Cronkite was your typical irresponsible American-hating journalist. But Hanoi Jane was an outright traitor who should have been punished for her crimes.

    Aid And Comfort: Jane Fonda in North Vietnam.

  54. 54 | July 18, 2009 4:31 pm

    re: #49 by iam7545

    It may be childish bullshit but it’s his right to say it. I’d almost say we have a duty to speak our minds on such matters.

    I don’t agree with it -- as a christian I would never wish anyone to go to hell -- but I can’t tell him to just not say it. Free speech means sometimes having to hear things we don’t really want to hear and you, as an American (or so I assume) have a a powerful protection for your speech. Over here we have no such protections any more. It did exist, through tradition and precedent, but it has been rendered ineffective by a state that considers itself to be above the law so whilst I may disagree with what was written here in a very strong way I can’t say it should be taken down, and I find your insistence that it be taken down purely because you disagree with it’s content to be… unappreciative of the freedoms you have.

  55. 55 | July 18, 2009 4:39 pm

    re: #54 by archonix

    I agree 10 thousand percent.

    BTW, are you in the UK?

  56. iam7545
    56 | July 18, 2009 5:17 pm

    archonix -- there is a time and place for everything. Posts like this take away all credibility for our side.

    There is also a proper way to state our side. Are you saying we need to stoop to the level of the KOZ KIDZ to be heard?

  57. 57 | July 18, 2009 5:21 pm

    re: #55 by savage

    I am. I thought my spelling would have given me away before now. :D

    re: #56 by iam7545

    Well, yes, you’re right, it is stooping to that level but, again, that’s the reality of Free Speech. It’s ugly like a rock hurled at the edifice of established dogma, and it’s the foundation of every other freedom we strive for.

  58. no2liberals
    58 | July 18, 2009 5:25 pm

    You can disagree with the thread, you can disagree with what posters have to say, you can also simply not click on it if the thread doesn’t appeal to you.
    However, asking that the thread be taken off because you find it distasteful, displays a degree of arrogance I find offensive.
    If you didn’t notice, there are some strong opinions about Wally, and the occasion of his death is the appropriate opportunity for us to express them.
    I would find a poster proclaiming their unrequited love for Wally less offensive than your request.
    I detested the man, I haven’t said anything flattering about him, even if my choice of words aren’t quite as strong or acerbic as others.
    To put it more succinctly, you forget yourself, sir.

    *Another note to Wally from Bill Shake.*

    I scorn you, scurvy companion. What, you poor, base, rascally, cheating, lack-linen mate! Away, you moldy rogue, away!

  59. iam7545
    59 | July 18, 2009 5:37 pm

    f you didn’t notice, there are some strong opinions about Wally, and the occasion of his death is the appropriate opportunity for us to express them.

    errrrr -- why?

    Well, yes, you’re right, it is stooping to that level but, again, that’s the reality of Free Speech. It’s ugly like a rock hurled at the edifice of established dogma, and it’s the foundation of every other freedom we strive for.

    It has little to do with free speech. You can say what you want about his politics -- the vile language proves what? What point does it make the day after any man dies?

  60. no2liberals
    60 | July 18, 2009 5:41 pm

    re: #59 by iam7545
    What basis for a thread about this despicable man would have existed last week?

  61. iam7545
    61 | July 18, 2009 5:51 pm

    however, asking that the thread be taken off because you find it distasteful, displays a degree of arrogance I find offensive.

    It is distasteful. I never suggested that any moderator remove it. Did I?

    I thought maybe Bob would have some class and remove it himself.

    I can accept that you find me and my opinion offensive. So do many others. However I have posted no offensive language here. I simply stated my opinion.

    And in an effort to support this site and keep this sites cred I felt it important that I say my piece.

    I think Bob could reword this post and get his point across without the vile scum bag language the day after a man’s death. I still hold hope that he will.

  62. iam7545
    62 | July 18, 2009 5:52 pm

    What basis for a thread about this despicable man would have existed last week?

    errrr ahhhhh emmmmmmm -- that is not the issue here. The issue is the vile language on this day. Capiche’??

  63. no2liberals
    63 | July 18, 2009 6:06 pm

    re: #61 by iam7545

    It is distasteful. I never suggested that any moderator remove it. Did I?

    Yes, you did, which is what I find most offensive.

    45. iam7545 on 18 July, 2009 at 3:26 pm reply
    This post should be removed

    Notice, you didn’t say comment, but post.

    I simply stated my opinion.

    No, you asked that a post be removed because you found it offensive. If you had only offered your opinion, there would be no beef.

    that is not the issue here. The issue is the vile language on this day. Capiche’??

    No, the issue is requesting the author of this thread remove it. You didn’t enter this comment section condemning Wally or extolling his virtues, but rather criticizing the author and the posters.

  64. iam7545
    64 | July 18, 2009 6:11 pm

    hey no2 -- listen closely here. I dont care what you think about me. OK.

    You appear to be famished (yiddish for mixed up).
    Your above post is contradictory. Read it

    TATA --

    Have fun

  65. no2liberals
    65 | July 18, 2009 6:18 pm

    re: #64 by iam7545
    You lie, and call me contradictory?
    AMF to you.

  66. 66 | July 18, 2009 6:21 pm

    re: #64 by iam7545

    Your comments are contradictory, iam7545. Read them, famished one.

  67. song_and_dance_man
    67 | July 18, 2009 6:58 pm

    There is a reason why all of the many who have visited and posted once and again are no longer here.

    Coincidence is not a factor.

  68. Bob in Breckenridge
    68 | July 18, 2009 7:13 pm

    re: #61 by iam7545

    I thought maybe Bob would have some class and remove it himself.

    Hey, fuck you, you piece of shit. You show up here all of a sudden and start telling us what and how we should post?

    Your arrogance is breathtaking, asshole.

    And for someone who claimed he’d never come back here, you seem to be coming back here an awful lot.

    We all get along fine and have before you started posting here, and we’ll all get along just fine and dandy when you leave.

    No one is forcing you to read this or click on any of our links.

  69. no2liberals
    69 | July 18, 2009 7:28 pm

    re: #67 by song_and_dance_man
    Not sure I follow.
    I see threads that author’s have put much time and effort into, and draw little response. Its happened to me, here and at other blogs. Then suddenly, for no reason, there is a rush of commenting and chatting on one or more threads.
    Personally, I would have ignored Wally’s passing as dispassionately as a dead squirrel in the road.
    But since there was a thread, and one that was not a fawning piece about him(for once), some of us took the opportunity to express ourselves.
    Bob expressed himself, as did others. However, when someone states a post should be removed because they find it distasteful, that is crossing a line that should not be crossed.
    It’s made worse when they lie then tuck tail and run.

  70. sk
    70 | July 18, 2009 7:54 pm

    re: #48 by jakee308

    jakee308, what I was trying to get at is that if a change in public opinion drove American retreat (and it seems to have), body bags mainly drove the change, which was occurring before Cronkite took his public stance against the war. What I do not know is the interaction effect between body bags and Cronkite. GIVEN the loss of support for the war before Cronkite went on a rampage, he might well have LESSENED the support even more and definitely energized war opponents. This might well have hastened American retreat, and it certainly helped structure a “narrative” that helped out future leftists.

    I have seen no reputable evidence that Cronkite alone was sufficient (or even necessary) in this whole mess.

    EDIT: You know, I really should chase down the journal article that I am thinking about for the details.

  71. song_and_dance_man
    71 | July 18, 2009 7:58 pm

    re: #69 by no2liberals

    That post was not directed at you… but since you ask.

    It is a common conundrum that certain posts are susceptible to the search for truth of the readers.

    I was commenting on the fact that many have visited and no longer remain and was suggesting a reason.

  72. sk
    72 | July 18, 2009 8:20 pm

    iam7545 is apparently a troll. It’s comical that he comes on here and poses as someone who is motivated by his desire to have this blog prosper. But then he says that he knows most of us and won’t be back again. Let’s see. For him to care sincerely about this blog prospering, he would, we presume, have read this blog for a while. If so, he would be familiar with those who post here. But then he says that, being familiar with the people who post, he is out of here.

    Oh what a tangled web we weave,
    When first we practise to deceive!
    Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.
    Scottish author & novelist (1771 -- 1832)

  73. bar
    73 | July 18, 2009 8:31 pm

    I just found out that Caliente means ‘hot’ in Spanish.
    F**k, I am really stupid!!!

    I want iam7545 too remain, I like different opinions and yes I do want this blog to prosper, hence my limited postings.

  74. wright1
    74 | July 18, 2009 8:37 pm

    re: #67 by song_and_dance_man

    You raise a good point. My resistance to the tone was based on taste -- anyone can rant or curse or spew; but if you want this site to be a place of ideas and not just a groupthink which is opposite to 1.0, then you are going to find that some posters will lose interest if the play of the day is reflexive attacks (even after someone has not even been buried yet)… The fact that there was so much defense of this post when it is so plainly out of bounds makes the point. No one who is truly interested in posting here is so vacant that they don’t get how pernicious W.C. was to this nation. Tell me something I do not know. But there is a time and place for dissent and there should be some standard of dialogue that goes beyond that of a 4th grader. I do not post here much because I am waiting for a bit more balance. Persons like G of the C gave me hope but I do not see her much anymore or others like her…so, yes, the door will hit us in the a-- if that is your desire but you are going to be left with a small bunch of grumblers in an echo chamber -- just a smaller one than at 1.0. Before you attack, consider that a request for a bit of moderation as not wholly unreasonable.

  75. no2liberals
    75 | July 18, 2009 8:40 pm

    re: #73 by bar
    Being in Cali, I figured you knew what caliente meant.
    You must work on being a cunning linguist, like me.

  76. no2liberals
    76 | July 18, 2009 8:43 pm

    re: #74 by wright1
    But if we all share the same taste, and post tributes to Wally, like so many others, wouldn’t that also make us an echo chamber?
    It’s really simple for me, I look at all the threads, but some don’t interest me, so I pass them by. That is the approach I recommend.
    I think controversial posts are a good thing, from time to time.

  77. wright1
    77 | July 18, 2009 8:52 pm

    re: #76 by no2liberals

    I am not for all of us agreeing -- obviously. That said, I hear what you are saying. I am not an admin. here so I do not know the enrollment numbers. But, to some extent, if the goal is attracting new posters, someone looking at this particular post would say, “Uh, no thanks”…now to be fair, maybe there are more zealots who support that type of analysis. As for me, I am pretty conservative but as an attorney, I guess I am trained to respond to reason. In the future, I will take your advice and just move on I guess.

  78. song_and_dance_man
    78 | July 18, 2009 8:54 pm

    re: #74 by wright1

    How you got from that to this is amazing.


    You are not alone in your assessment.

    Check your ass commentary balances on a finely calibrated fulcrum and should not include a vulgar based response or commentary that crosses the line of common sense or decency.

  79. wright1
    79 | July 18, 2009 8:58 pm

    re: #78 by song_and_dance_man

    Uh… in English now?

  80. bar
    80 | July 18, 2009 9:04 pm

    re: #75 by no2liberals

    I should have know, being in Cali and all.
    I know what a Rancho as in land is, “Caliente” not so much.

    So those ‘Buffalo Hoofs’ are really “Simi Caliente” Hoofs.

    Simi is pronounced ‘see-me’.

  81. bar
    81 | July 18, 2009 9:07 pm

    Oh and a toast to DirecTV, they hooked me up today. So NFL Sunday ticket is on, baby.

    I want my HDTV!!!!!! Not my MTV..

  82. bar
    82 | July 18, 2009 9:11 pm

  83. no2liberals
    83 | July 18, 2009 9:17 pm

    re: #77 by wright1
    I agree with you on reasonableness, as you might note my comments weren’t as derisive as some.
    I also try to avoid the vulgarities when I post.
    What I am saying is, I don’t have to agree with everyone’s style of posting, or the comments, but that is why this forum exists, so people can express themselves freely.
    I respect your position, and would have respected iam7545s position, had the request to remove the post not been posited.
    I also respect the position others have taken that were considerably more caustic.
    I don’t expect agreement on everything from everyone.
    As a Viet Nam vet, and one who saw some good men lose everything they had, and some their souls, I am particularly harsh on people like Wally, for their betrayal. But that doesn’t mean I have lost my reasonableness, even with those I view as my enemies.

  84. no2liberals
    84 | July 18, 2009 9:20 pm

    re: #80 by bar
    Well, as long as they aren’t Semi-Caliente.
    /cunning linguist

  85. song_and_dance_man
    85 | July 18, 2009 9:20 pm

    re: #79 by wright1

    Thanks for the vote for saliency.

    ‘Check your ass’ is an old 1.0 way to say, I will investigate what you say in light of the facts and post the opposing side of view.

    I thought you knew that.

    Also, ah never mind

  86. 86 | July 18, 2009 9:23 pm

    re: #85 by song_and_dance_man

    There was a time on 1.0 that “Trust but Verify” meant something.

    Once they started praising themselves for how well they did it, it went downhill..

    But that’s pride. When you focus on making something good or great or pride yourself on how good you are….. you lose sight of what you’re supposed to be doing and that’s when you fail or, in tv show terms, you ‘jump the shark’

  87. wright1
    87 | July 18, 2009 9:23 pm

    re: #83 by no2liberals

    Isn’t it funny how you can formulate a picture in your head about someone by what they write or by an avator they use? I never would have guessed that you were a Vietnam Vet. So, let me say thank you for your service. You would be in a very good position to be, well, caustic…if you so chose. There is little I can add to what you know already, that W.C. helped undermine your efforts and your compatriots, which if history was accurately told, were leading ultimately to victory. As for this skirmish, like I said before, my hope is for this particular blog to get hot and succeed because BHO and the Dems are so very dangerous. So this blog can be a force for good. That was what 1.0 once was. Anyway, thanks for the insight.

  88. no2liberals
    88 | July 18, 2009 9:23 pm

    re: #81 by bar
    NFL, eh?
    Not for me, I despise Hollywood.

    Fifty days to the start of college football, and forty nine for high school football.

  89. song_and_dance_man
    89 | July 18, 2009 9:27 pm

    re: #86 by LanceKates

    The Sith complex?

  90. 90 | July 18, 2009 9:31 pm

    re: #89 by song_and_dance_man

    Hey, everything can relate to star wars. :D

    The Jedi, around Episode 2 and 3, was much like the UN. They had lost their ability to function, but hid it so as to keep the appearance of being in charge. It led to their downfall as the UN has now failed.

    Meanwhile, with the leftward slide of the government, particularly with the election of an outright socialist (Who just yesterday said that he doesn’t WANT to run healthcare, just like he said he didn’t WANT to run banks or didn’t WANT to run GM….), we find ourselves unable to determine which side in the struggle is right. If, when it comes down to it, we end up defending the United States when it becomes a socialist nation, are we then socialists?

    Where do YOU draw the line?

    Ok, bedtime. Have a good one.

  91. no2liberals
    91 | July 18, 2009 9:38 pm

    re: #87 by wright1
    You are welcome, as it was my duty and honor to serve.
    I should note, that I wasn’t in combat, as we usually know it. Combat operations had ended when I went overseas, but was involved in the evacuation of Viet Nam. A terrifying and thrilling adventure for a young man.
    As I stated way up thread, I was watching Wally when he gave his defeatist monologue, and was shocked through my entire body. I couldn’t express what I was thinking or feeling, but I intuitively knew what he was saying was, if not traitorous, deleterious to the morale of the nation and they young men and women serving. I had already lost friends, had others serving, and my oldest brother was soon to be deployed. My anger at him has never subsided, and I only wish I hadn’t entered the baggage claim area before he and his wife came by on the other side of the glass at the D/FW concourse, I would have given him a strong piece of my mind.
    As for the success of this blog, I don’t know that there is a formula we can apply. Those who contribute, both the authors, and the posters have a valuable role to play in that. The first step, which is what the blogmocracy stands for, is that no topic is out of bounds, and we can all express ourselves freely, irrespective of our opinions. I will never ask another to be respectful, but it is my approach, unless or until, one demonstrates that will not be returned.

    For a goof, if you would like to read the story of my return, in the spring of ’75, here is the link.

  92. song_and_dance_man
    92 | July 18, 2009 9:46 pm

    re: #90 by LanceKates

    I draw the line on a check your ass commentary that balances on a finely calibrated fulcrum.

    Note: Check your ass. An oft used 1.0 term that denotes a challenge of facts that are suspect which are subsequently verified.

    Commentary: Things people say.

    Balances: A means to weigh things.

    Calibrated fulcrum: That funny middle thing that gives a midpoint for each side of those thingies that need weighing. In other words a fine point for the execution of justice.

    Take notes Wright

  93. bar
    93 | July 18, 2009 9:48 pm


    Yeah, something about that NFL me likes. Blame my pops.
    Or maybe its living within 30 miles of Hollyweird as the crow flies that does that.

    Or maybe this gay shite?????


  94. no2liberals
    94 | July 18, 2009 9:53 pm

    re: #93 by bar
    The NFL ran me off when they went to free agency, and the mercenary athlete became the norm.

  95. bar
    95 | July 18, 2009 10:05 pm

    re: #94 by no2liberals

    I hear that, I don’t like it either.
    Actually I like NFL Sunday ticket so I can follow the local college boys. Plamer and Linart are two that I follow from the crazy USC football team.

    Too bad the Bengals suck! Poor Palmer.

  96. bar
    96 | July 18, 2009 10:05 pm

  97. no2liberals
    97 | July 18, 2009 10:10 pm

    re: #95 by bar
    I like following Texas kids, except when they go to colleges outside of the general area.

  98. Richard Romano
    98 | July 18, 2009 10:11 pm

    re: #39 by RickMZ

    It’s pretty clear from my first sentence how I feel about his “journalism,” no?

    I’m trying to be “nice,” in other words.

  99. no2liberals
    99 | July 18, 2009 10:19 pm

    re: #98 by Richard Romano
    As nice as you could be, IMO.

  100. no2liberals
    100 | July 18, 2009 10:19 pm

    I’ll be #100 and call it a night.

  101. bar
    101 | July 18, 2009 10:24 pm

    So kinda like an 80′s California surfer.
    Locals only!

    I missed out on highschool football, so the opposing soccer players paid the price for it.
    I broke the best player in towns leg with a legal slide tackle, unfortunately he and I was on the same team, although not at that exact time. [Can you say Scrimmage] what part of that don’t “they” understand.

    I also broke a guys elbow while playing racquetball, man I felt bad, but you know he shouldn’t have talked so much shit before that game.

  102. no2liberals
    102 | July 18, 2009 10:28 pm

    re: #101 by bar
    Well, it just burns my biscuits when a good player from my state goes to USC/Notre Dame/Miami.
    Turncoats, I tells ya’.

  103. bar
    103 | July 18, 2009 10:41 pm

    The QB for Notre Dame last year or the year before is a local kid from my area-ish it is from a local Christian school, I think Wayne Gretzky and Joe Montana kids go there, that HS team he was on really kicked ass big time.

    Yet In College he sucks really bad.

  104. Ben_Dover
    104 | July 19, 2009 1:22 am

    Well Bob, your thread sure has brought lots of attention.

    OTOH I thought your thread was crude and mean but OTOH maybe it’s needed. If this guy is worshipped as some sort of standard for journalism, then he or his legacy need to be brought down to Earth. Egos have to be crushed and there will a lot of wailing.

    Perhpas the burn or rot in hell was a bit over the top? I may disagree with you but i respect your right to speech.

  105. CloudyDay
    105 | July 19, 2009 2:29 am

    I was a kid when Cronkite was on CBS in the 1970s, and I remember the constant news segments about the Vietnam conflict at that time.

    While I am no fan of liberal journalists (especially ones who tend to slant their reports in a liberal direction or who are anti-American, etc.), I found this blog entry to be way too harsh.

    I would save that kind of outrage (actually, it seems to border on hatred) for pedophiles, and for people who abuse the elderly and people who hurt/kill animals*.

    (*And no, I don’t mean to include people in that group who get hunting permits to shoot deer; not that I’m a fan of that, but I mean stuff like this evil young lesbian, who in a fit of rage at being dumped by her sweetie pie in the UK put the ex-girlfriend’s live kitten in a heated oven, slammed the door shut, and cooked the kitten alive -- that story was reported in some British online paper).

    Then you have the radical Muslims who murder rape victims, regularly blow up civilans, and strap bombs to children.

    People who engage in that sort of activity are worthy of intense dislike, to the level I see expressed in this blog page, but a liberal journalist? :?:

  106. CloudyDay
    106 | July 19, 2009 2:34 am

    re: #32 by jakee308

    Indirectly contributed to the agony of the war and in later years turned out to be a virulent anti-christian.

    BITE ME.

    Telling someone else “Bite me” isn’t exactly Christian behavior.

    re: by jakee308

    Also, where does all this respect for the dead come from? They’re not in a position to do anything about it and when we’re dead we won’t be too concerned about what’s being said about us.

    Even if Cronkite were still alive, it would not change my opinion that the original blog entry was too harsh.

  107. CloudyDay
    107 | July 19, 2009 2:48 am

    re: #90 by LanceKates

    Aw man, you guys would have to mention Star Wars in this thread, right after I posted the dancing Darth Vader video in another one!

    Well here it is again, hope nobody objects to me posting it in more than one thread.

  108. CloudyDay
    108 | July 19, 2009 3:03 am

    Re: Why the USA did not win in the Vietnam conflict (or was not successful, it may be more accurate to say) -- I saw someone up above mention the media, someone else brought up body count.

    It’s my understanding that while the media did play a role (this is, I believe, the first ‘war’ that was televised, that showed dead bodies etc), that the American politicians would not allow the American military to win, and this was a major crux of the problem.

    IIRC, the politicans told the military they could not, for example, invade North Vietnam (they were afraid of ticking off China I think), so our guys could not go past the DMZ, so after a skirmish, the bad guys (the VC) could run back up home and recover between fights.

    I have been told the way to win a war is to kill the enemy and plant your nation’s flag in their soil, so to speak. This was not the method carried out in Vietnam.

    Didn’t the same thing happen in Korea too?

  109. RickMZ
    109 | July 19, 2009 5:26 am

    re: #108 by CloudyDay

    I have been told the way to win a war is to kill the enemy and plant your nation’s flag in their soil, so to speak. This was not the method carried out in Vietnam.

    Didn’t the same thing happen in Korea too?

    I can see where you might think that, but Korea was a different animal. Korea was a UN-authorized war, with the US having the largest contingent of member-nation troops (but there were a lot of member-nations involved; the Iron Curtain had only recently appeared). When the US troops got to the Yalu River, they were ordered not to invade China. Later, China crossed the Yalu. In Korea, we were most definitely fighting Chinese soldiers on the ground, which was Russian involvement by proxy. The Russians had just detonated their own atomic bomb, and the fear of nuclear armageddon involving Russia (through China) was a real concern. In Viet Nam, we fought the Vietnamese, whether regulars or the Viet Cong (Viet Minh). There were some Russian pilots flying Mig’s, plus all the Russian supplies going into Haiphong that we couldn’t properly bomb, and Chinese/Russina technical advisors, but there were no Russian or Chinese ground troops overtly engaged against us.

    Korea, in my mind, is the first example of bureaucrats fighting a war not to lose, which is where there is a distinct similarity with Viet Nam. In Korea, there is still only a ceasefire, not a treaty ending the war.

    The irony, if you will, between Korea and Viet Nam is that after our politicians cut and ran, the Vietnamese had their own dustup with China, a real shooting disagreement which is largely forgotten now (right around the time of the beginning of the Iran-Iraq War as well as the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan; the world was moving and we had a weak president [hmmm . . . , sounds familiar]). Korea, on the other hand, has remained a staunch loyal subordinate of China, and is still used as a proxy in China’s realpolitik.

  110. 110 | July 19, 2009 6:47 am

    I was half afraid that there would be a wishy washy ‘tribute’ to that whirling commie POS!

    late to the party

  111. joeb
    111 | July 19, 2009 6:56 am

    The gullible were taken in by this creep because he looked like everybody’s kindly old grandpa.

    Cronkite’s skill was knowing how to hide his far-left views from the American people, and was much more clever in how he worked his bias into his “news reporting” than the left-wing wackos so prevalent today.

  112. joeb
    112 | July 19, 2009 6:58 am

    re: #4 by sk

    And Cronkite did everything he could to use that body count to promote his agenda, including running a scrolling list of all those who died at the end of each broadcast.

    How long do you think the American people could have maintained their will power during WW2 if radio “newsmen” had read lists of the newly dead at the end of each day?

    Cronkite’s actions were despicable. The damage he did to the journalistic profession is probably irreparable.

  113. no2liberals
    113 | July 19, 2009 7:11 am

    re: #106 by CloudyDay
    I agree the post was harsh.
    I also think it served a useful purpose, as it has generated some excellent debate.
    The fact remains that Wally was a despicable man, and his defeatist monologue was our first insight into how bad he truly was.
    At least this site didn’t follow suite, and pretend that he was somehow an American icon that will be missed.
    As we move beyond the early days since his death, we are seeing more and more about him that is atrocious. To praise him would be a insult to those who love this country.
    At this point, I might ask, was it too harsh, or not harsh enough?
    Meet The Real Walter Cronkite.

    In 1999, he appeared at the United Nations to accept the Norman Cousins Global Governance Award from the World Federalists Association. He told those assembled, including Hillary Rodham Clinton, that the first step toward achieving a one-world government – his personal dream – is to strengthen the United Nations.

    “It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace,” he said. “To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order.”

    The most trusted man in America?
    What an excellent piece of propaganda that was.

  114. 114 | July 19, 2009 7:18 am

    WND has some good links to artys on comrade wally

  115. 115 | July 19, 2009 7:25 am

    “Burn in hell” is perfectly acceptable for the creep.

    That Nancy censors the truth about Walter shows his true colors as a Leftist wannabe.

  116. no2liberals
    116 | July 19, 2009 7:32 am

    re: #114 by BenZacharia
    Indeed they do.

  117. 117 | July 19, 2009 9:16 am

    Darell “Shifty” Powers died on June 17 after fighting cancer.

    A true American Hero.

  118. no2liberals
    118 | July 19, 2009 9:24 am

    re: #117 by BenZacharia
    I got an email calling for a Memorial for Shifty, did you get the same thing?
    Yes, a simple man that did heroic things.
    Rest In Peace, Shifty, you and your band of brothers will soon all be together again.

  119. 119 | July 19, 2009 9:26 am


    No I didn’t.

  120. 120 | July 19, 2009 9:26 am



    The most decorated aviator in Marine Corps history was laid to rest in Portland. Colonel Ken Reusser passed away on June 26th. Combat missions in 3 wars; WWII, Korea and Vietnam.

  121. necromancer
    121 | July 19, 2009 9:32 am

    BenZacharia there’s a great article on “Shifty” Powers on the blackfive blog.And yes I was in the USMC(R)at the time Conkrite said the things we are discussing here and I remember it well because it was about the time of the “Tet” offenseive and we where scared shitless that there was a possibility of being called to active duty.I have three friends that served active at that time and two made it home the other was killed in 69.In fact the reserve center that I belonged to at the time just came back from active duty the end of 2007.

  122. no2liberals
    122 | July 19, 2009 9:33 am

    re: #120 by BenZacharia
    Yeah, commented on the amazing Col. Reusser.
    Here is the email I got.

    Subject: Memorial Service: you’re invited. Photo attached

    If it wasn’t for the “Shifty’s” of this great nation we would all be in trouble.

    God Bless.

    We’re hearing a lot today about big splashy memorial services.

    I want a nationwide memorial service for Darrell “Shifty” Powers.

    Shifty volunteered for the airborne in WWII and served with Easy Company of the 506th Parachute Infantry Regiment, part of the 101st Airborne Infantry. If you’ve seen Band of Brothers on HBO or the History Channel, you know Shifty. His character appears in all 10 episodes, and Shifty himself is interviewed in several of them.

    I met Shifty in the Philadelphia airport several years ago. I didn’t know who he was at the time. I just saw an elderly gentleman having trouble reading his ticket. I offered to help, assured him that he was at the right gate, and noticed the “Screaming Eagle”, the symbol of the 101st Airborne, on his hat.

    Making conversation, I asked him if he’d been in the 101st Airborne or if his son was serving. He said quietly that he had been in the 101st. I thanked him for his service, then asked him when he served, and how many jumps he made.

    Quietly and humbly, he said “Well, I guess I signed up in 1941 or so, and was in until sometime in 1945 .. . . ” at which point my heart skipped.

    At that point, again, very humbly, he said “I made the 5 training jumps at Toccoa, and then jumped into Normandy . . . . do you know where Normandy is?” At this point my heart stopped.

    I told him yes, I know exactly where Normandy was, and I know what D-Day was. At that point he said “I also made a second jump into Holland , into Arnhem .” I was standing with a genuine war hero . . . . and then I realized that it was June, just after the anniversary of D-Day..

    I asked Shifty if he was on his way back from France , and he said “Yes. And it’s real sad because these days so few of the guys are left, and those that are, lots of them can’t make the trip.” My heart was in my throat and I didn’t know what to say.

    I helped Shifty get onto the plane and then realized he was back in Coach, while I was in First Class. I sent the flight attendant back to get him and said that I wanted to switch seats. When Shifty came forward, I got up out of the seat and told him I wanted him to have it, that I’d take his in coach.

    He said “No, son, you enjoy that seat. Just knowing that there are still some who remember what we did and still care is enough to make an old man very happy.” His eyes were filling up as he said it. And mine are brimming up now as I write this.

    Shifty died on June 17 after fighting cancer.

    There was no parade.

    No big event in Staples Center .

    No wall to wall back to back 24x7 news coverage.

    No weeping fans on television.

    And that’s not right.

    Let’s give Shifty his own Memorial Service, online, in our own quiet way. Please forward this email to everyone you know. Especially to the veterans.

    Rest in peace, Shifty.

  123. no2liberals
    123 | July 19, 2009 9:40 am

    I was at Wal-Mart yesterday, and as I was in the self-service checkout line, just completing my transaction, and old gentleman in an electric “rascal” rolled up to me.
    He asked if I would open the plastic cap on his Coca-Cola, and I quickly agreed. All the while I was looking at his “cover” with all sorts of badges and pins. As soon as I handed it back to him, he eagerly took a big pull on his coke. I was about to ask him about his hat and badging, but his wife approached, and she began asking him some questions.
    I didn’t get to talk with this old vet, but was proud to have shown him a kindness.
    I was also proud to know, with all the other people about, he knew the right person to go to.

Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David