I have no intention of defending everything MoveOn.org wrote or writes. Instead, I’ll simply defend a few basic facts. The best starting point there is to make sure we’ve all seen the ad: https://pol.moveon.org/petraeus.html

1. The MoveOn.org ad was not pure “smear.” It addressed past statements by General Petraeus and contrasted those with what we now know to have been the facts on the ground. (For the record, I think your reasons for liking Gen. Petraeus are all good and valid reasons, and I share many of them).

It also offered predictions, and they weren’t half bad: “Today, before Congress and before the American people, General Petraeus is likely to become General Betray Us. We may hear of a plan to withdraw a few thousand American troops. But we won’t hear what Americans are desperate to hear: a timetable for withdrawing all our troops.” This is exactly what happened. Given the accuracy of MoveOn.org’s prediction, can we really call their ad defamation?

2. Your claim that “if [Democrats] want to truly end the war, they have the power to do so by de-funding it” is technically accurate but realistically not part of any path the Dems could chart. First, I don’t believe that cutting funding is the will of – your words – the constituents that elected them to power. Second, it’s bad policy, both for Iraq and for the American military. Third, it’s bad politics; there are many who would love to see the Democrats once again forced onto the losing side of the national security debate, but it doesn’t look like they’re going to take the funding bait any time soon – to their credit.

Third, while I agree that decisions of life and death, of peace and war are “the most critical dialogue a nation will ever engage in,” I don’t think it’s fair to say that the nation’s current dialogue is over “whether or not to commit young Americans to fight a war for our nation.” That decision was made in 2003. The conflict the U.S. is mired in right now is a result of that decision, regardless of the coming and going of “mission accomplished” banners. The question now is about strategic redeployment and a reshaping of the American mission and commitment. It remains, though, the most important national dialogue.

For as long as we’re having that most important dialogue, it’s probably best we stick to the facts.