Dems can't handle the truth so they smear messenger

NY Post Editorial:

It's hard to decide which was the more disgusting: Monday's New York Times ad slandering Gen. David Pe traeus, or the newspaper's decision to publish it in the first place.

Or was it the refusal of Sen. Hillary Clinton - who aspires to become commander-in-chief - to condemn it?

The ad, placed by the hard-left paranoiacs at MoveOn.org, libeled a genuine American hero while further debasing the political debate in America - no mean feat, but all in a day's work for the social termites at MoveOn.

One expects better from the Times, though. It is one thing to print paid opinion - but quite another to participate in the rhetorical tar-and-feathering of a singular public servant like Petraeus.

His sin?

He presented to Congress a meticulously detailed report on the progress of the conflict in Iraq. The news, if not unambiguously good, is at least optimistic - that is, if one wants America to actually win the war.

And it's not Petraeus's view alone: Two U.S. intelligence agencies deemed the report's methodology and numbers the most accurate and authoritative on Iraq.

No matter. MoveOn begs to differ, and the Times seconds the motion.

The ad called Petraeus a liar - a "military man constantly at war with the facts" - and accused him of "cooking the books" about Iraq.

It called Gen. Petraeus "General Betray Us," mocking the one thing a military man cherishes most - and that MoveOn understands least: personal honor.

But forget the hard left for a moment. What about supposedly mainstream Democrats?

Don't they find this kind of fascistic smear over the top?

Apparently not.

Indeed, it seems they meant for groups like MoveOn to be their attack dog.

...

Yes, that is why they can't now condemn them after the ad backfired badly. Now they have tied themselves directly to the kook base that is desperate for defeat and they are also desperate that any reduction in force in Iraq look like a retreat and defeat rather than a victory.