Anti-war YearlyKos Panelist Gets Spanked By Move America Forward Vice Chairman

Photo of Noel Sheppard.

Two military veterans almost came to blows on MSNBC's "Hardball" Wednesday evening as they debated the war in Iraq, and what presidential candidate Hillary Clinton (D-New York) would do if she wins the White House.

On the left was anti-war activist Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org, who became known to most conservatives when he prevented a uniformed soldier from speaking at a YearlyKos breakout session last Friday.

On the right was Move America Forward Vice Chairman, and two-time New York Times bestselling author Buzz Patterson.

As the sparks began to fly early, I'm going to just role the tape (video available here), and allow you to read along with the transcript that follows (h/t Melanie Morgan):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: Welcome back to HARDBALL. It is time for tonight`s HARDBALL debate. Is Hillary Clinton a hawk or is she a dove? Jon Soltz is an Iraq War veteran with votevets.org. And Buzz Patterson is the vice chairman of Move America Forward, and a former military aid to President Bill Clinton. He is also the author of "War Crimes."

Jon, is Hillary the kind of candidate who we can trust to get us out of Iraq and not go to war with Iran?

JON SOLTZ, VOTEVETS.ORG: I think Hillary is someone who has all of the strengths of a strong commander-in-chief. She understands how we fight. I mean, when you talk to her privately, she can tell you the difference between an old brigade combat team and a new unit of action and how we have, you know, combined our mechanized infantry and armor. It is absolutely fascinating to speak with her behind the scenes.

Her last eight years in the Armed Services Committee she has learned from. And she understands why we fight. You know, I was at a large event with her several months ago and she pulled me aside and she asked me about staying in the Army or not staying in the Army. And I said, well, ma`am, I do not know.

You know, I love the Army, and my greatest hour was ever -- I ever had in my life was leading soldiers into war. And she says to me, you know, you are right, Jon. There is no greater honor than being in charge of our troops in a combat zone. And for her to understand that, like I said, she understands how we fight and why we fight. And she is somebody that.

MATTHEWS: So she is a hawk.

SOLTZ: She is not either. She is someone who represents sensible foreign policy. I mean, she is someone who will take the fight to al Qaeda.

MATTHEWS: OK. Help me out here. Should a hawk vote for her? Somebody who believes in this war in Iraq, should he vote for Hillary Clinton?

SOLTZ: I think people should vote for Hillary Clinton if they want someone who will protect America, take the fight to al Qaeda.

MATTHEWS: Well, help me out here, help me out here. If you are for war in Iraq, you want to keep the troops over there, you want to keep them fighting over there, should you vote for Hillary?

SOLTZ: I do not think you should vote for Hillary Clinton if you want to retreat and defeat against al Qaeda. If you want to defeat al Qaeda, you need to vote for Hillary Clinton. If you want to keep American troops stuck in the middle of a civil war in Iraq, you should go vote for a Republican.

But if you want a strong national security, someone who will rebuild the Army and Marine Corps, someone who will destroy al Qaeda in the Afghan/Pakistan region, you should support Senator Clinton.

MATTHEWS: OK. Let`s go to Buzz Patterson. How do you see Hillary, hawk or dove?

BUZZ PATTERSON, MOVE AMERICA FORWARD: Hey, Chris. She is a dove in hawk`s clothing. I mean, I know her personally, worked for her for two years, with her husband from 1996 to 1998, and she is anything but a hawk. I mean, she wants to pull us out of a Iraq. She voted for the war before she voted against the war, to coin a phrase from a previous candidate.

She will say anything she has to say, Chris, to get elected president. See, she is a pathological liar. She does not understand the military. I can speak first and foremost personally, knowing her intimately. She is not a hawk. She is anything but. She is a Wellesley College, socialist, anti-military, anti-American.

SOLTZ: That is absolutely ridiculous. That is so ridiculous.

MATTHEWS: How did you get that insight on her working -- were you her military attache or her husband`s military attache?

PATTERSON: Yes, I was President Bill Clinton`s Air Force aide from 1996 to 1998.

MATTHEWS: What did you hear sotto voce that we haven`t heard from her? What insight did you get from working at close quarters?

PATTERSON: Well, the fact that she wanted to outlaw military uniforms in the White House when I first arrived in 1996 is a perfect example. And she talks about President Bush now, Chris, not having the gumption to support our troops. Look at Bill Clinton`s record in the 1990`s. Drawing the Army divisions from 18 down to 10, drawing Air Force fighter wings from 24 to 12, reducing Navy ships from 586 to 324, cutting the military troop strength -- Josh know this better than anybody.

(CROSS TALK)

SOLTZ: He is wrong. He`s making the argument for us.

PATTERSON: John, I was there, pal. You were not.

SOLTZ: I was there.

PATTERSON: You weren`t in the White House. By the way, let me tell you --

SOLTZ: Let me tell you something, you weren`t in Kosovo when I was in Kosovo under Bill Clinton.

PATTERSON: I was in Bosnia.

(CROSS TALK)

MATTHEWS: OK, OK --

(CROSS TALK)

MATTHEWS: Here`s what I need -- Let`s pretend this is a court room. We need facts. John Soltz, you believe Hillary Clinton is a credible national defense expert. You believe that she is the strongest candidate of the Democrats running to defend the country, including continuing the campaign in Iraq.

SOLTZ: I think that all of the Democrats are stronger than the Republicans, because the Republicans right now have opposed increasing the size of our military for last seven years. It`s absolutely ridiculous.

PATTERSON: That is so incorrect.

SOLTZ: They have dedication of super duper missile defense systems in the sky that have alienated our allies. And the Democrats have a position where we can take the fight to al Qaeda in Afghanistan. I was in Kosovo when we had --

(CROSS TALK)

SOLTZ: Why did we have armor equipment under Bill Clinton in Kosovo, but when I was in Iraq, we didn`t have it?

(CROSS TALK)

SOLTZ: Bill Clinton was a better commander-in-chief than George W. Bush.

MATTHEWS: John, nobody`s hearing anything here. Let me ask you, Buzz Patterson -- this is a question. Based on all that you know about the Clintons, including the former president, six months into office, how many American troops will remain in Iraq.

PATTERSON: She will yank about half out, which will be a debacle. It will be a nightmare. John, I`m so happy you`re not serving in Iraq right now, stabbing your fellow men and women, like you`re doing --

MATTHEWS: OK, John Soltz, six months into the Clinton presidency, how many troops will we have in Iraq?

SOLTZ: You will see an offensive against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. You`ll probably see a redistribution of troops to take the fight to the enemy, to the people that attacked our country, and keep America safe.

MATTHEWS: You both agree that she will cut the number of troops dramatically in Iraq?

SOLTZ: Absolutely.

MATTHEWS: You say that two, Buzz?

PATTERSON: I agree with that. I think we will be out of there in about 12 months.

(CROSS TALK)

PATTERSON: We are fighting Iraq -- we are fighting al Qaeda in Iraq.

SOLTZ: You know what, I don`t need the memo. I was in Iraq. You read the newspaper, I was in Iraq. That`s the big difference between you and I.

PATTERSON: I have been to Iraq too.

SOLTZ: Are you talking about your ra ra sis boom ba cheerleader tours the White House takes you on?

PATTERSON: Are you still in the Reserves, John?

SOLTZ: I`m a private citizen right now, chairman of VoteVets.org.

PATTERSON: are you getting a DOD paycheck?

(CROSS TALK)

MATTHEWS: You guys can settle this outside. I want to thank Buzz Patterson and John Soltz.

—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Can we get a straight answer?


MATTHEWS: OK, John Soltz, six months into the Clinton presidency, how many troops will we have in Iraq?

SOLTZ: You will see an offensive against al Qaeda in Afghanistan. You`ll probably see a redistribution of troops to take the fight to the enemy, to the people that attacked our country, and keep America safe.

I just LOVE the way this guy doesn't answer the questions.

Reminds me of Hillary during the debates.

Tap dance and let the pundits and your followers tell everyone how well you did and answering the tough questions.

 

To Stolz: So the only ones

To Stolz: So the only ones we should attack are the ones who attacked us?  So why did we in WWII not go for Japan who attacked us and instead attack Germany who had not directly attacked us?  Were you really an officer?

Nuke em til they glow then shoot em in the dark.

Wow

I am constantly amazed at how disgusted I become upon reading the crap that Stoltz spews. He is an imbecile. It makes me sick to see what a freakin' Clinton Boot-Licker he is. He has absolutely no factual information to back-up his claims, whereas Patterson does. And, he tries to constantly discredit Patterson by questioning his history of service... And falls on his face in doing so...! What a dolt. I feel so sad that this moron can serve as such an embarrassment to our troops. He needs to take his Kos buddies and shove their microphones up their asses..

Soltz is just saying

Soltz is just saying whatever he thinks will help the Clinton Legacy.

1.)  The statement that the Liberals better armed the US in combat than the conservatives (Kosovo/Bosnia vs Iraq/Afghanistan) ignores the fact that all of those pricey armored vehicles Soltz speaks of being used in the Balkans were funded by conservatives directly against the wishes of the liberals.  The M1 & M2 series of vehicles were voted against by most liberals in congress.

2.)  From what others who served in the DC in the 90's have told me, Buzz Patterson is correct.  The White House became extremely hostile ot its own military staff during the Clinton years, particularly at the start when the "Children of the 60's" staff was at its fiercest.

This is embarrasing for

This is embarrasing for MSNBC. This is what constitutes debate and in-depth analysis of our presidential candidates? I sure didn't learn anything new about Hillary. I don't take either men at their word, and I'm left wondering what Hillary's stance will be on Iraq and combating terrorism.

Of course, she hasn't explicitly talked about her plan, or at least the media hasn't made it available. But assuming I know nothing of her past waffling and playing up to the anti-war base, I would give her the benefit of the doubt. Yet these fools provide no context or dialogue to convince the "on-the-fence" voters of Hillary's inclinations. (BTW I am not a Hillary fan) It's just conjecture and opinion.

 I don't take either men

 I don't take either men at their word

Why don't you take Buzz Patterson at his word?

Unlike Stoltz (a proven liar), Lt.Col. (ret) Patterson actually served in the last Clinton White House.

To compare the honorable Patterson to a George Soros funded  lying skunk like Stoltz is a preposterous stance to take.

And why would you give Hillary Clinton the benefit of the doubt.

There is no doubt. The debate is over... She's another proven liar, with a vicious, well-documented hatred of the military, who fully supported her husbands dismantling of the US military.

That's two  preposterous comments in the same post.

Well done

Check out my latest YouTube...but only if you support the troops and their mission: Better Men Than Me/The Battle For Fallujah

You could be a guest debater

You could be a guest debater on Hardball.

Hillary is a panderer-

Hillary is a panderer- trying to stay in the "middle" (however the leftoids define this word), therefore there is no coherent answer for she flip and flap. She will deploy her bimbos to asnwer these "hard" questions, so she won't be quoted that she said it. For the mean time, she will appear only on pre-arrange debate, answers to pre-arrange questions, so she can compose her answers prior to. A hawk or a dove? I don't know people, my assessment, she's a...socialist/communist, a leftoid lying-liberal demoCrack.

she's a...socialist/communist, a leftoid lying-liberal demoCrack

That just about sums it up alright.  May want to add in carpetbagging abortionist.

v

"People think we're paranoid when we talk about the vast right-wing conspiracy, but there is a real connection of these groups -- the same names keep popping up," said NH dem party chairmanSullivan. "They are the most disgusting group of political thugs that I have ever seen."

Stolz used the best method

Stolz used the best method he could employ to defend Hillary and as we saw, it was the classic Clinton strategy ---- the flat-out lie. But in this venue Stolz had an honest, credible opponent countering with the ugly truths about Hillary so additional Clinton stategies were necessary to be deployed --- demonizing your opponent, character assasination, shouting and screaming over your opponent so as to keep viewers from hearing too many of said ugly truths. And of course, that old Democrat stand-by --- disrespecting and marginalizing our troops while actively fighting and defending America.  I hope the GOP candidate, whoever he may be, has fully prepared himself for a long, dirty battle for the White House.

Soltz - "I love the Army,

Soltz - "I love the Army, and my greatest hour was ever -- I ever had in my life was leading soldiers into war."

What I don't understand is Soltz's claim that he 'led troops in combat' in Iraq.

According to Soltz's bio - he only spent a few months in Iraq.

"From May to September 2003, Soltz served as a Captain during Operation
Iraqi Freedom, deploying logistics convoys with the 1st Armored Division"

So it seems Soltz was a logistics officer with four months of actual in theater rear echelon non-combat experience. Sort of reminds me of John Kerry's Vietnam 'combat' experience.

Very interesting read about

Very interesting read about Soltz in the post:

1) Sen. John F. Kerry
(D-Mass.), who appeared with four veterans yesterday morning, said he
saw parallels between VoteVets.org and Vietnam Veterans Against the
War, the group of protesters he led during Vietnam. He said he
recognized the anger he saw in Soltz. "When you come back from fighting
the enemy, you are passionate and feel very strongly about duty," Kerry
said.

I don't know how deploying logistics convoys is considered 'fighting the enemy'. I think Marines and Soldiers who are trigger pullers would have a laugh at that.

2) When Iraq war veteran Jon Soltz accused Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell
(R-Ky.) of "aiding the enemy," the Democratic senators gathered around
him yesterday did not wince. Nor did Democrats object when Soltz, the
chairman of a group called VoteVets.org, called President Bush and Vice
President Cheney "draft dodgers."

Source:

http://www.washingto...

I hope Buzz punched him in

I hope Buzz punched him in the nose, at least once for me. I would do it, but dont have the time to travel.

Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!

I'm actually quite

I'm actually quite surprised that Matthews would have a credible, well-reasoned spokesman like Buzz Patterson on to represent the anti-Hillary side of this argument.  When the Elizabeth Edwards ambush technique isn't available, Matthews either shouts over the more conservative representative or employs the Floyd R. Turbo-type straw man to represent the Republican position.  Oh, and the more phony creeps like Jon Soltz are seen in the light, the better chance we have to beat Hillary or any of the other Democrats.

Buzz Patterson is my new hero.

She will say anything she has to say, Chris, to get elected president.
See, she is a pathological liar. She does not understand the military.
I can speak first and foremost personally, knowing her intimately. She
is not a hawk. She is anything but. She is a Wellesley College,
socialist, anti-military, anti-American.

That pretty much sums up the Hildebeast, as far as I am concerned. I've been waiting for someone to say this publicly. Too bad nobody was watching, as many members of the dumbmasses really, really needed to hear this. My fear is that too many of the less intelligent among us are going to turn out on election day and put this hideous woman in the White House.

I just hope Buzz doesn't wind up sitting under a tree in Ft. Marcy Park.....

Buzz was the guy who carried

Buzz was the guy who carried the "nuclear football" for Billy Jeff Clinton. Here's a short excerpt from his book about Bubba, fittingly called "Dereliction of Duty"

"THE WHITE HOUSE SITUATION ROOM was buzzing. It was fall 1998 and the National Security Council (NSC) and the "intelligence community" were tracking the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden, the shadowy mastermind of terrorist attacks on American targets overseas. "They've successfully triangulated his location," yelled a "Sit Room" watch stander. "We've got him."

“Beneath the West Wing of the White House, behind a vaulted steel door, the Sit Room staff sprang into action. The watch officer notified National Security Advisor Sandy Berger. "Sir, we've located bin Laden. We have a two-hour window to strike."

“Berger ambled down the stairwell and entered the Sit Room. He picked up the phone at one of the busy controller consoles and called the president. Amazingly, President Clinton was not available. Berger tried again and again. BIN LADEN WAS WITHIN STRIKING DISTANCE. The window of opportunity was closing fast. The plan of attack was set and the Tomahawk crews were ready. For about an hour Berger couldn't get the commander in chief on the line. Though the president was always accompanied by military aides and the Secret Service, he was somehow unavailable. Berger stalked the Sit Room, anxious and impatient.”

“Finally, the president accepted Berger's call. There were discussions; there were pauses-- and no decision. The president wanted to talk with his secretaries of defense and state. He wanted to STUDY the issue further. Berger was forced to wait. The clock was ticking. The president eventually called back. He was still INDECISIVE. He wanted more discussion. Berger alternated between phone calls and watching the clock.”

“The NSC watch officer was convinced we had the right target. The intelligence sources were conclusive. The president, however, wanted a guaranteed hit or nothing at all.”

“This time, it was nothing at all. We didn't pull the trigger. We STUDIED the issue until it was too late-- the window of opportunity closed. Al-Qaeda's spiritual and organizational leader slipped through the noose

Hillary exposed

"See, she is a pathological liar. She does not understand the military."

Kudos to Buzz for having the courage to speak the truth in Liberalville.

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.
Thompson/Rice

LK,

Hillary exposed????

Ah, it's getting way too close to dinner time to be thinking about that.

Blech!