MEMO: Fact vs. Fiction in the Limbaugh "phony soldiers" controversy
To: Interested Parties
From: Karl Frisch, Media Matters for America
Re: Fact vs. Fiction in the Limbaugh "phony soldiers" controversy...
Date: Friday, October 5, 2007
Below you will find a brief description of Rush Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comments along with documentation that corrects common misconceptions in the media about the controversy surrounding his remarks and subsequent statements on the subject.
OVERVIEW
During the September 26 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Rush Limbaugh characterized service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers." Limbaugh said to a caller that "[t]here's a lot" that people who favor U.S. withdrawal from Iraq "don't understand" and that when asked why the United States should pull out, their only answer is, " 'Well, we just gotta bring the troops home.' ... 'Save the -- keep the troops safe' or whatever," adding, "[I]t's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people." Limbaugh's caller replied, "No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media." Limbaugh interjected, "The phony soldiers." The caller, who had earlier said, "I am a serving American military, in the Army," agreed, replying, "The phony soldiers."
FACTS vs. FICTION
FICTION: Limbaugh's comments referred to only one soldier
FACT: During his September 28 broadcast, responding to criticism of his comments, Limbaugh claimed that rather than speaking generally of soldiers who support withdrawal from Iraq, he was "talking about one soldier with that 'phony soldier' comment." Later in the program, he asserted, "[E]verybody involved in this knows full well I was talking about one genuine, convicted, lying, fake soldier," referring to Jesse MacBeth, who pleaded guilty to one count of making false statements to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs for pretending to be an injured Iraq war veteran. But as the September 26 transcript makes clear, Limbaugh actually referred to "phony soldiers," plural. Responding to the caller's statement that supporters of withdrawal "like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media," Limbaugh responded, "The phony soldiers" [emphasis added].
FICTION: Limbaugh's comments
occurred
during a discussion about Jesse
MacBeth
FACT: On the October 2 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, while purporting to give viewers "some background" on Limbaugh's comments, co-anchor Megyn Kelly reported: "Rush originally used this term 'phony soldiers' when he was talking about a guy named Jesse MacBeth. ... Limbaugh was making the point that this guy was basically a 'phony soldier,' and he was trying to say that sometimes people on the left use 'phony soldiers' like this to make their points." But contrary to Kelly's assertion that "Rush originally used this term 'phony soldiers' when he was talking about" MacBeth, Limbaugh did not mention MacBeth on the September 26 broadcast of his radio show until 1 minute and 50 seconds after he used the phrase "phony soldiers." After Limbaugh used the phrase, the caller he was speaking with went on to discuss the purported presence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, with Limbaugh responding. Limbaugh then thanked the caller for calling, and the caller is not heard again on the broadcast. Only after this did Limbaugh bring up MacBeth on his September 26 show.
FICTION: Limbaugh's comments
referred
to a group of actual military
imposters
FACT: During his September 28 broadcast, following his repeated assertions that he had been referring to "one soldier," a caller asked, "But you did say 'soldiers' in plural, though, didn't you?" Limbaugh replied: "Yes, because there have been a number of these people, but they were not active duty -- I was not talking about anti-war, active duty troops. I was talking about people who've been exposed as frauds who never served in Iraq but claimed to have seen all these atrocities, [unintelligible]." Limbaugh repeated this explanation during his October 2 broadcast, describing MacBeth as "the man I was referring to and others like him as 'phony soldiers.' " However, this explanation is inconsistent with his statements earlier in his September 28 program -- noted above -- that he had been talking about "one soldier." Indeed, the transcript (subscription required) of the September 28 broadcast that is posted on Limbaugh's website shows him asserting: "I was talking about one soldier with that phony soldier comment, Jesse MacBeth [italics, bold, and underline in original]."
FICTION: Limbaugh played the
"entire"
segment to explain his remarks
FACT: On his September 28 broadcast, Limbaugh purported to air the "entire" September 26 segment in which he referred to "phony soldiers" to prove that "Media Matters ... selectively choose[s] what they want to make their point." In fact, the clip he then aired omitted a full 1 minute and 35 seconds of the 1 minute and 50 second discussion that occurred between Limbaugh's original "phony soldiers" comment and his reference to MacBeth, the full audio of which can be heard here. Prior to airing the edited clip, Limbaugh said: "Here is, it runs about 3 minutes and 13 seconds, the entire transcript, in context, that led to this so-called controversy." After the clip ended, Limbaugh stated: "That was the transcript from yesterday's program, talking about one phony soldier. The truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose, which is exactly the way the website Media Matters generated this story."
Further, the transcript (subscription required) of his September 28 broadcast posted on Limbaugh's website does not make clear how much time elapsed between Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" remark and his discussion of MacBeth -- or even that it omitted any part of the conversation: Limbaugh's transcript does not provide any notation or ellipsis to indicate that there is, in fact, a break in the transcript of the September 26 clip he used.
Similarly, during the October 2 edition of Fox News Live, after Fox News aired a brief clip of Limbaugh's September 26 "phony soldiers" comment, Carrie Lukas, director of policy for the conservative Independent Women's Forum, asserted, "If you go on for another, about 30 seconds, you hear Mr. Limbaugh start talking about Jesse MacBeth."
FICTION: Limbaugh did not call Rep. Jack Murtha a "phony soldier"
FACT: During the "Strategy Session" segment on the October 2 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, conservative talk show host Bill Bennett claimed that Limbaugh "did not call [Rep.] Jack Murtha [D-PA] a 'phony soldier.' " Bennett asserted that instead, Limbaugh "took Jack Murtha on, on the merits of the argument." In fact, during his September 28 broadcast Limbaugh stated:
LIMBAUGH: I was talking about a genuine phony soldier. And by the way, Jesse MacBeth's not the only one. How about this guy Scott Thomas who was writing fraudulent, phony things in The New Republic about atrocities he saw that never happened? How about Jack Murtha blanketly accepting the notion that Marines at Haditha engaged in wanton murder of innocent children and civilians?
According to Murtha's biography on his congressional website, Murtha joined the Marines in 1952 and volunteered for service in Vietnam, where he was awarded the Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.
FICTION: Limbaugh didn't compare wounded Iraq vet to suicide bomber
FACT: On his October 4 radio show, Limbaugh asserted that he "didn't call" wounded Iraq veteran Brian McGough "a suicide bomber" on his October 2 show and said he was "grateful" for McGough's service. McGough appeared in an ad released by VoteVets denouncing Limbaugh's "phony soldiers" comment. In the ad, McGough says to Limbaugh, "Until you have the guts to call me a 'phony soldier' to my face, stop telling lies about my service." Limbaugh said on October 2: "[T]his is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said, then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media in a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into." Several media outlets have noted Limbaugh's comments, reporting that Limbaugh compared or likened McGough to a suicide bomber, including the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, and ABCNews.com. Further, FoxNews.com reported that "Limbaugh decried the ad by the group that he linked to MoveOn.org, figuratively saying VoteVets is treating McGough like a suicide bomber."
###
RSS Feeds
Please, media matters for very little, keep this story going. This foolishness lets Americans see how whacked out the left is and what the democrat party of today is all about. Please continue to embarass yourselves and make it easier for Americans to clearly see what left leaning ideology will bring to this county. Let's hope that this time the democrat candidates will be true to their tenets and not run from the label of 'liberal' at crunch time.
Keep shouting your message from the mountaintops, stay honest about what shape America will take with the left in power and then let the voters decide.
So 'proudconservitive', you're a proud conservitive? So what your saying is that you're a gay pedophile,drug addict, using the boil on your butt to stay safe and sound in your spider hole, insulting brave men and women who've risked their own lives believing that they're safeguarding your right to disparage them? Wow, that's really something to be proud of.
I think you have proudconservative confused with Barney Frank, Gerry Studds, Bill Clinton, and the sissy David Brock.
Rush LimpBrain has me confused with the "Phony Soldier" his is. I was fighting for his right to call me these names but we all know what accurate name he is...
Damn ChickenHawk yellow coward like most of the Bush Administration. Pardon my anger. I'll get over it when their out of office in 08. That's also when Rush will get tired again of carrying all that Republican't Whale Poop known as Cool Aid and Bad Tasting Water. Yuk!
"Sissy" ??? Did you actually just use the word "sissy" ?
If I had a cup of coffee I would have spewed it all over my computer laughing so hard.
Talk about playground mentality. Oh my Lord.
Mahatamamamia,
The depth of your wisdom and insight astounds me! Wow, with such keen development of logic and powerful conception of the real issues, what hope do we conservatives have? After trying intellectually to maintain on equal footing with you, it was all to much. Your brain and it's magnificient ability to demonstrate knowledge beyond those of mere mortals is amazing! After that posting, I guess we all must bow to your prowess. How does one get so quicky to the heart of the matter, the essence of the arguement without any useless blather and create such an astute collection of words? And funny too!
Kudos on one of the best pieces of posting that I have ever witnessed! You and your mahatmama mama should be be so proud.
Deconstructing PC
The depth of your wisdom and insight astounds me! Wow, with such keen development of logic and powerful conception of the real issues, what hope do we conservatives have?
And have you ever displayed development of logic and conception of real issues? I await your first attempt.
After trying intellectually to maintain on [sic] equal footing with you, it was all to [sic] much. Your brain and it's [sic] magnificient [sic] ability to demonstrate knowledge beyond those of mere mortals is amazing!
Do something about all those simple errors before you feel the need to lecture us about knowledge, okay?
After that posting, I guess we all must bow to your prowess.
No, but you could try some honest debate. Or is that simply beyond you?
How does one get so quicky to the heart of the matter, the essence of the arguement [sic] without any useless blather and create such an astute collection of words? And funny too!
So, are you proud of being a conservative, or proud of your own bottomless pit of arrogance, or maybe both?
Kudos on one of the best pieces of posting that I have ever witnessed! You and your mahatmama mama should be be so proud.
And kudos to you for such astonishingly poorly-written and poorly-thought-out sarcasm. Whenever I wonder if someone on your side can damage the intellectual free flow of ideas even more, along comes someone like you to lower the bar even more.
Political wrong- Religion Left Behind,
Did you actually read the thread above my response? Will you defend your friend MG-Hammer and his "displayed development of logic and conception of real issues?"
Well, in case you didn't....
Please, media matters for very little, keep this story going. This foolishness lets Americans see how whacked out the left is and what the democrat party of today is all about. Please continue to embarass yourselves and make it easier for Americans to clearly see what left leaning ideology will bring to this county. Let's hope that this time the democrat candidates will be true to their tenets and not run from the label of 'liberal' at crunch time.
Keep shouting your message from the mountaintops, stay honest about what shape America will take with the left in power and then let the voters decide.
So 'proudconservitive', you're a proud conservitive? So what your saying is that you're a gay pedophile,drug addict, using the boil on your butt to stay safe and sound in your spider hole, insulting brave men and women who've risked their own lives believing that they're safeguarding your right to disparage them? Wow, that's really something to be proud of.
So, Left-Behind:
I'd be glad to debate more than I already have. My sarcasm in that particular response had to do with the moronic comments of the dear MG-Hammer, it was his unwillingness to engage in debate to which I responded. Look elsewhere on this site and see how I lay out the benefits of conservatism in its treatment of individual and our country and how I see that leftism does the contrary for both.
This nonsense about Rush is a weak attempt to claim the high moral ground of loving the military. As I have posted to others, it is not the young republicans closing down ROTC on campuses or protesting the presence of military recruiting offices in the community.
http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/April/06/local/stories/01local.htm
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/210741_protest04.html
http://www.socialistworker.org/2005-1/535/535_02_CCNYStudents.shtml
(these on first page of a yahoo search on protesting military recruiters)
When you consider the comments of democrat political leaders over the years, even within the past three years, you gain the sense that many inherently believe that soldiers are terrorists themselves, use gestapo tactics, are reminiscent of the stalinsits running gulags and are outright murderers. They gladly jump to those conclusions because that is their a priori perspective, ie. worldview, of what the military is.
That is why I believe this idea of making 'phony soldiers' a centerpiece of a basis for supporting the troops, is a laughable attempt to make the case that history can be erased. Members of the military know who support them and who would toss them under the bus if politically expedient.
Your thoughts?
PS. By the way, you win the 'spellcheck' & 'grammercheck' software debate. (Sorry, I couldn't give up the sarcasm stuff cold turkey, you know!)
Why are you so angry? What's with the name-calling. Have your Dad or Mom reply to the next comment since you aren't mature enough. Take a Xanax.
Proud conservative:
I just took a moment, with the e-mail address provided by MMFA, and contacted the radio station I hear Rush on & thanked them for putting him on the air.
Have a good one.
I've done likewise. The program director said they have no intention of giving into the MMFA fascists.
Of course not. But they will give in to their sponsors.
I have contacted some of his sponsors and informed them that if they do give in to this witch hunt, I won't buy their products.
Naive and gulllible. You love being led don't you? So did the Jim Jones followers. Anyone with more than a minus ten IQ can see through Rush Limbaugh.
Proudconservative:
We have a right as citizens to analyze what is being broadcast on our airwaves and hold media figures accountable for what they say, just as you do.
If RushannityborxBObeckfox and friends can't handle it, maybe they should find another line of work.
As far as Media Matters reflecting well or bad on any particular ideology or party, I am sure you are COMPLETELY INCAPAPBLE of recognizing the many right wing smears that have been a part of our politics in recent years. Up to now the smears do not seem to have weakened the conservative movement at all. Once swift boated, it is hard to regain reputation. The doubt always exists, especially in an unquestioning, gullible media.
Rush clearly communicates every day that those of us who are not conservative are less patriotic and are morally and intellectually deficient. Why on earth would he make an exception for our troops who do not get it either? Especially when those troops beliefs have a legitimacy that questions Rush’s “logic” to the core. Of course he is going to attack their legitimacy.
I think you believe that those who disagree with your worldview and politics should just disappear and certainly never challenge those who stereotype and label them. I am sorry it is difficult for you to handle the fact that some of us are responding to such attacks by pointing them out publicly.
Rush's message often is unchallenged, illogical, unfair, inaccurate and uninformed. It might make you feel better but it has left you unprepared to deal with a complex world where not everyone is going to ditto ditto along like they are supposed to.
Ebee-jeebees,
I DON'T want the left to stop. Our perspective about the media, whether left or right tilting, is a full 180 degrees apart. I think the media is biased to the left, you feel the opposite.
What I know for certain is that politicians hate being labeled as 'left or liberal', even if those are their tendencies. When an election comes, they will run for the center's hills hoping to loose the baggage of the left. When a conservative runs, they almost always do better when they stick to their guns. When they don't, they loose power like in 06.
Why I appreciate the efforts of Media Matters(vl) is becausse it brings to better light the distictions between the philosophies of the political left and right. By doing that now, the candidates of the left won't be able to shed values in order to get elected. This will hold their feet to the fire.
The actions of bowelmovement.org and MM(vl) and the controversy surrounding their conduct will link candidates to that kind worldview, at least those who support or don't distance themselves from them. And that is good for the conservative cause because America doesn't agree with what the left believes about our country and the direction it should take.
That is also why MM(vl) is jumping on this Rush nonsense about not supporting the troops. America and the troops know who supports the military and who would throw them to the wolves if given the chance. This charade is about deflecting away from the clarity the bowelmovement.org brought to the left. The left HATES the military, its purpose and its function of killing and breaking things. They are hoping that this ruse lets them off the hook and makes them appeal to those Americans who think the ad and the comments of democrat leaders over the years comparing soldiers to the gestapo were disturbing. Problem is, I believe, that the more you scream the more America sees and will be appalled.
As for defending Rush, I believe in the power for good that conservatism embodies. That good for certain, has been furthered a great deal because of Rush, his appeal and changing the paradim for information dissemination. He's not perfect, but his message, or rather his explanation of the message of conservatism, is what America needs to excel and continue to be a beacon for liberty and individual freedom.
I do not believe in the left's message for America or the world. It is diametrically oppossed to the greatness of our nation through rugged individualism, the personal freedoms we love and how unique and superior our idea of government truly is.
" The left HATES the military"
I don't but I guess according to you I should!
I am glad you will tolerate us and I appreciate that you have it all figured out. The last 7 years of republican conservative leadership really does set a good example, doesn't it?
He-be,
You probably complain that the politicians don't go far enough. I do the same with mine. When they act as conservatives, they always win. When they spend like democrats, are more interested in maintaining personal political power, don't make lower tax rates permanent and engage in corrupting their office for personal gain they loose. And they did loose in 06 for those very reason.
As for your support of the military, I'm sorry I impugned you personally. I just know with my experience, the young republicans have never picketed the army recruiting office or forced the ROTC from campus.
I almost fell off my chair laughing at your Post. Here's what you need to do: Tune out Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter and the rest of the garbage for one month. Tune in to THE REAL WORLD. Learn that our Country has less freedom under Right Wing Rule than at any time in our history. Know that those who send our soldiers to die have never served in the military themselves. Learn that GW Bush and Dick Cheney are knee deep in the $$ for oil game. Understand that your attempts at "reverse phycology" went out of style with high button plastic shoes. Know that we have no working relationship with the rest of the world because of people like you. And most of all pat yourself on the back and say "I am to blame for the deaths of 4,000 soldiers. I am to blame for the destruction of Iraq. I am to blame for the grieving mother who holds her lifeless child in her arms because of my bombs." Yeahhhhh....you really have much to be proud of ....don't you.
My God...What shape has the Country taken with Right Wingers in charge.
When you say your prayers tonight ask God to forgive you for backing Bush and his administration which has resulted in the loss of 4,000 American lives and countless Iraqi Lives. You ARE to blame you know.
These neo nazi's, who would have been popular in Germany in the 1930's, have destryed democracy in this country with their hypocrosy and their lying. Limbaugh is a disgraced hypocrit. a serial liar and a dope head. Who cares what that moron says except another moron
given the state of the united states under conservative rule you can keep yer wonderful conservative world: endless war, a tanking economy (trade deficit, enormous debt), ongoing energy crisis, rising gas prices (remember before bush? around a dollar a gallon), division of the electorate, sex scandals, medical insurance crisis (need i go on?). what a wonderful place to raise children.
Boy no wonder you clowns make up 27% you slime balls on the right scream bloody murder about the move on ad yet you rally behind a man that called troops phony if they support a pull out of Iraq. This shows why you republicans will be in the minority for the next 30 years.
Wow. This story really has legs. Keep talking, Rush. We're listening.
Media matters is far from looking bad. Comedian Rush Limbaugh and his ilk are scared and the only defense they have is saying they are out of context.
If they are taken out of context they have to prove it, if they can't (and has yet to do so) then they have no legs to stand on.
Rush and Fox noise are tabloid media.
Please, Rush "Pilonidal Pusbag" Limbaugh, keep this story going. This foolishness lets Americans see how whacked out swastika radio is and what the reich wing of today is all about. Please continue to embarass yourselves and make it easier for Americans to clearly see what reich-wing Kool-Aid drinkers will bring to this county. Let's hope that this time the reich-wing short-busers will be true to their tenets and not run from the label of 'anti-American neofascists' at crunch time.
Keep shouting your message from the mountaintops, stay honest about what shape America will take with neofascists in power and then let the voters decide.
Heresjonnie,
Thanks for making my point and, gee, thanks for demonstrating your keen wit as well!
"I think the Army is much more connected to society than the Marines are. Marines are extremists. Wherever you have extremists, you've got some risks of total disconnection with society. And that's a little dangerous." - Assistant Secretary of the Army Sara Lister, 1997
In the 1990s, members of the Clinton administration attacked our troops and sissies like David Brock remained silent. In 2007, the sissy Brock lies about what Rush Limbaugh said about the troops and is feigning outrage. Brock and his fellow sissies at MMFA couldn't care less for the troops. There is not a single one of these sissies who spent a day in uniform.
Lies about what Rush said? Huh? Do you have to blur your eyes to keep that stuff going? They PRINTED what Rush said. What Rush said is available here and elsewhere. Just not on Rush's show or Fox. Then it's pretty cut up. What is it you're not seeing kevin?
The Rush guys are just about the weirdest phenomenon. I remember starting college in the 80's and there were guys who would snort little bottles of 'rush' which must have been something like glue. Sure didn't smell as good as my beer and seemed to just make them dumber quicker. rush. Rush. There has to be some connection.
SUNDOG:
Interesting spin. In order to determine what Limbaugh really said, you advise us to not listen to what Rush really said. Instead, we should take the out-of-context spin from the sissies at MMFA.
Any time the sissies at MMFA are ready to discuss what Limbaugh really said, my fellow Marines and I will be there.
MMFA provided what bozo the limbaugh really said, where as bozo provided what he wanted you to think he said. You believe the lie, and not the truth. But please, keep showcasing your willing ignorance. The more you do, the further you slip into obscurity. The complete implosion of comtemporary conservitism is rather strange, but very satisfying, to watch.
Actually, you sissy, I was listening to Limbaugh when he said it. It was clear that Limbaugh was referring to phony soldiers and not soldiers who disagree with the mission in Iraq.
You pathetic morons are being led by the sissy David Brock, a proven liar and discredited journalist.
"Actually, you sissy..."
Candypants !
The Marines who should "take the bones out of their noses" ?
And Rush did spend time in the Military? Oh shame on those people who said he was deferred due to an Anal Syst.
Jonny must be David Brock's Monica Lewinsky. Hey, Jonny, don't you know that David Brock is a proven liar and discredited journalist?
What exactly does that have to do with what Rush said?
Since when do you care about what can be proven? Rush is a proven a liar by the article you just read...or probably didn't read....you trolls are always just anxious to comment...not read.
MMFA is like a robot. You include more insulting material in your posts today than they have since they launched. The cultic smokescreen that Rush supporter are kicking up is so thick and full of its own lies, that a fact sheet is in order.
If you don't like it there is room for you in the cultic circle jerk going over at frontpage.
Not to mention a sissy !!
Heh.
ProudConservative, are you going to sit there and deny that Rush called Jack Murtha a 'phony soldier'? Yes or no please. Another question - What would constitute a 'genuine soldier' in your mind?
Of course, you come on here and post a pile of drivel about how the left is this or that without any actual comment on what MM has posted. What should we readers of this site conclude from that?
BTW, it's 'DemocratIC Party' not 'Democrat Party'. Why is that so difficult for you Righties to understand? I am assuming that English is your native tongue so you should know that 'democrat' is a NOUN and 'democratic' is an ADJECTIVE. If you are describing something (e.g. a political party) you would use the ADJECTIVE not the NOUN.
Liberals on Air America like Randi Rhodes are clearly threatened by Rush or they would not continue with their versions of twisted truth especially on this story. I have listened to RUSH for years and have the utmost respect for him. It is laughable the way the left has twisted it and by devoting day after day of their airtime to it reflects how much they are threatened by him. GO RUSH!
I listened to the audio file lots of times trying to figure out what Rush meant with his phony soldiers comment. It's hard to definitively say what was intended. One things for sure, he never said "Anti-war veterans are phony soldiers", so I think it's a mistake for Media Matters to state it as fact as they do above - "Rush Limbaugh characterized service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers"". Rush is the only one who will ever REALLY know what he meant.
Rush was wrong to say he was replaying the entire conversation the next day when in reality he had cut out over a minute of discussion. The removed part didn't really change anything, but he shouldn't have said it was the entire conversation.
I can see why Rush used the word "soldiers" instead of "soldier". The caller used the word soldiers, "like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media," and Rush was commenting on the caller's comment - Limbaugh responded, "The phony soldiers". It wouldn't have made sense to say "The phony soldier". I'm guessing he was thinking of a specific phony soldier (MacBeth) as a perfect example of other phony soldiers, i.e. others that had lied about their military experience.
Strangely enough, the only fact above is that Limbaugh indeed compared McGough to a suicide bomber, and then lied about it. Other than that, MM is really grasping for a story. If Limbaugh wasn't such an idiot, MM would be cowering like Moveon.org after the Petraeus debacle.
1) It is completely a moot point whether Limbaugh's comments were plural or singular. If Limbaugh misused the English language then what does it matter to the topic at hand? Using a plural to refer to a singular is a common mistake when speaking off of the cuff, and adds nothing what-so-ever to this discussion.
2) MM continues to void the contextually relevant Jesse Macbeth monologue that occurred after Limbaugh hung up with the caller. It is completely logical and most likely that Limbaugh, after being assailed by a tangent from the caller, used the first opportunity to define "phony soldiers" with the Jesse Macbeth story. The transcript logically reads Phony Soldiers - WMD - Phony Soldiers.
This is probably the weakest part of MM's argument. This is what is driving this story into mediocrity despite the fact that Limbaugh actually has been caught lying about McGough. If MM would drop the irrelevant "facts" that are really conjecture, then they could actually do some damange.
3) The 1 minute and 50 second gap in the Limbaugh edit is irrelevant. It is not that hard to imagine a nationally broadcast radio show editing the content to omit the WMD tangent. Just as was stated previously, the WMD conversation does not make the Jesse Macbeth monologue insignifigant to the context of the "phony soldiers" statement.
Unless MM can make a better argument than a temporal one, then this point should be dropped as well. Are MM's current comments irrelevant to the debate simply because they're a week old now? If a week cannot automatically kill a flowing dialog then certainly two minutes cannot.
The rest of the so-called facts above are just rehashes of earlier listed "facts." Limbaugh lambasted Murtha not for being a dissenting veteran, but for his Haditha comments. Limbaugh played all of the relevant parts of the tape, and the omission of the WMD conversation is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT.
Limbaugh did indeed lie though, and that was when he claimed he never compared McGough to a suicide bomber. This is what MM should be hammering home, instead of this completely disjointed and senseless phony soldier conjecture.
Want a more logical parsing of the transcripts?
So who do you think are the opposite of the "real soldiers" who want to "serve" and stay in Iraq?
It is really funny to watch a house of cards built on sand tumble at the slightest gust of scrutiny.
You probably should read the link at the bottom of my last post. It shows clearly that the caller's comments do not retroactively redefine Limbaugh's use of the word phony soldiers. This is due to the law of cause and effect.
Since Limbaugh never agrees or affirms the caller's definition of real soldiers, then we must use the Jesse Macbeth definition.
I disagree. He had just called the previous caller,a veteran who advocated pulling the troops out, a phony.
And you are right that the context for his "phony soldier" comment was not about real soldiers wanting to go to Iraq. It was about people who call for withdrawal for the troops.
A few points:
Didn't Rush lie when he said that he presented an entire transcript, when it was edited?
I believe that the transcript he provided was the entire relevant transcript. The omitted two minutes would have been a drag for national radio, and would have confused the clear point he was making.
This is much different than Media Matters' omission of the Jesse Macbeth section. Limbaugh only omitted an irrelevant WMD discussion, while MM voided Rush's reuse of the term "fake soldiers" in context with Jesse Macbeth's story. If the nearly two minutes he cut was COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT, why not put in some indication that he made the cut instead of hiding it and lying about it? If this is such an obvious thing, why not let the entire context speak for itself?
Because of the irrelevance, there was absolutely no reason to acknowledge it.
Why is it that you think you can't possibly tell whether Rush is agreeing or disagreeing with the caller when he says "They joined to be in Iraq",
Actually, I can tell. I don't see his response as an affirmation. I believe it is common sense to read the transcripts, listen tot he audio, and observe that Limbaugh meant Jesse Macbeth when he used the term phony soldiers
I just don't believe my opinion is fact, so much as it is a qualified opinion. I can show the logical flow of the discussion to prove this while MM has yet to make a logical case for their argument.
but you can determine that Rush compared McGough to a suicide bomber? He never used the words "suicide bomber", did he? Isn't that obviously subjective interpretation on your part?
Of course my interpretation is subjective. It matches what MM believes Limbaugh said, and I believe that the McGough comments are far less ambiguous to interpret.
I'm not arguing that MM cannot have an opinion. Instead I'm arguing that most of their opinions are based on disjointed logic and conjecture. I am also stating that due to the highly subjective interpretation of the phony soldier comments, that MM can never win that argument.
Multualdisdain
So do you really believe that rush feels that dissenting soldiers are NOT phony soldiers?
Regardless of the wording, any listener to Rush (and his immitators) clearly believe that non conservatives are less than American, intellectual and morally deficient and therefor suspect. This has been Rush's message since the 80's.
So now I suppose rush will start giving the non phony soldiers a lot of airtime on his show to explain thier views?
I doubt it, these "phony soldiers" pose a real threat to the muck he has continually dished out for years.
Oops typo above:
Regardless of the wording, Rush (and his immitators) clearly believe that non conservatives are less than American, intellectual and morally deficient and therefor suspect. This has been Rush's message since the 80's.
You've still ignored that Rush claimed that the edited remarks he rebroadcast were the entire conversation, unedited and in context while claiming that MMfA took him out of context and edited him.
There may have been very good reasons to edit the clip such as relevancy, time, etc. But not only did Rush not mention that cutting but he also very distinctly said that there was no cutting. Starting off one's defense of themself with an easily proven lie is nto a good indication of truth following.
Why is it that you think you can't possibly tell whether Rush is agreeing or disagreeing with the caller when he says "They joined to be in Iraq",
Actually, I can tell. I don't see his response as an affirmation.
-------------------------------------------
I think his responses actually were affirmation of who qualified as a "real soldier." Not only did he pretty much repeat what the caller said about real soldiers "wanting to be in Iraq," he elaborated:
"CALLER 2: The phony soldiers. If you talk to a real soldier, they are proud to serve. They want to be over in Iraq. They understand their sacrifice, and they're willing to sacrifice for their country.
LIMBAUGH: They joined to be in Iraq. They joined --
CALLER 2: A lot of them -- the new kids, yeah.
LIMBAUGH: Well, you know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you signed up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan or somewhere.
CALLER 2: Exactly, sir."
And by the way, I never saw him refute the caller's earlier claim that he was "one of the few" who signed up out of patriotism and not for the money.
"I believe that the transcript he provided was the entire relevant transcript. The omitted two minutes would have been a drag for national radio, and would have confused the clear point he was making."
The point is he claimed to provide the entire context. "Relevant" is up for the reader to determine. I have no idea why you think "a drag for national radio" is a concern, considering he altered a written transcript. Was that two minutes' worth of text too much for the server to handle?. As for confusing the issue, if he has to doctor the transcript to avoid that, then his point is not "clear" to begin with.
"This is much different than Media Matters' omission of the Jesse Macbeth section. Limbaugh only omitted an irrelevant WMD discussion, while MM voided Rush's reuse of the term "fake soldiers" in context with Jesse Macbeth's story."
Now this is funny stuff. You argue that providing the full text would have "confused" the clear point Rush was making, but that's not the case for MMfA? Remember, the caller took Rush's term and made sweeping generalizations about our troops. Rush talking about one literally fake soldier two minutes later doesn't have anything to do with that, and therefore it would just be confusing the clear argument.
"Because of the irrelevance, there was absolutely no reason to acknowledge it."
To cut it out and not put in any indication of it at all while calling it the "entire" transcript is flat-out dishonest, and you can't get around that. You acknowledge it because it's what actually happened. There is literally no legitimate reason to make something look like a full transcript when it isn't. You can put in marks to show that you've made a cut quite easily.
"Actually, I can tell. I don't see his response as an affirmation. I believe it is common sense to read the transcripts, listen tot he audio, and observe that Limbaugh meant Jesse Macbeth when he used the term phony soldiers"
Whether he personally was talking about MacBeth when he used the term has no bearing on the nature of his "they joined to be in Iraq" comment. There is no logical explanation for how that comment can be construed as disagreement. You're using the predetermined conclusion to analyze the evidence. "I believe he meant X." "What about when he said Y, how else do you interpret that but as to mean Z?" "I don't see it that way because it's common sense he meant X". That's fallacious at best.
"Of course my interpretation is subjective. It matches what MM believes Limbaugh said, and I believe that the McGough comments are far less ambiguous to interpret."
Less ambiguous than "They joined to be in Iraq", immediately after the caller talked about how real soldiers wanted to be in Iraq? Oh please.
Now you're understanding what I was telling you before, now that you're applying it yourself. When there's only one reasonable interpretation, then the subjectivity isn't a relevant concern. There's only one reasonable interpretation for his suicide bomber comparison, just as there's only one for his "they joined to be in Iraq" comment. But for some reason, you dismiss Rush's obvious agreement because that's "subjective". I wonder why...?
"I have no idea why you think "a drag for national radio" is a concern, considering he altered a written transcript."
Let me amend that:"I have no idea why you think 'a drag for national radio' is the only concern, considering he altered a written transcript as well."
He could have made marks on the website to indicate a cut. In the radio broadcast, he could have noted "a couple of minutes later..." and then continued the playback. There's absolutely no reason not to do these simple things, unless you're trying to mislead people.
>>I believe that the transcript he provided was the entire relevant transcript.
Which overlooks the fact that Rush claim it was UNEDITED. No way around it, Rush has lied throughout this.
>>The 1 minute and 50 second gap in the Limbaugh edit is irrelevant. It is not that hard to imagine a nationally broadcast radio show editing the content to omit the WMD tangent.
That's the weakest part of your argument. Rush presented the material as UNEDITED and apologized for its length. Had he been honest and said it was edited for time constraints, fine. But he chose to lie.
A single instance of soldier vs. soldiers could be overlooked, but Rush continued to say "THEY knew what THEY were signing up for" which is a completely incomprehensible statement if he was actually talking about ONE non-soldier named MacBeth who didn't sign up.
Face it, your attempts to spin this in Rush's favor conflict with your attempt to sound rational... no rational person can defend the deceptions and defamations of Mr. Limbaugh.
And the chronic lying continues. I got this chestnut from Limbaugh's website. He's discussing Brandon Friedman, totally distorting what he said (naturally) but this, to me, was the funniest part (empahsis mine):
The reason Dingy Harry and the rest of the Democrats do not show publicly with members of VoteVets.org is because they don't want you to know the intricate degree of coordination between these anti-war groups and elected Democrats in the House and the Senate. That's why they never cite them; that's why Dingy Harry didn't cite them.
Using this logic, I may assume that the reason the Queen of England has never mentioned Rush in public is that she wishes to keep their torrid affair secret.
Keep up the good work, MM.
OK, I have read the transcript and listened to the audio on this site. I still don't interpret it the way everyone else does. To me a "fake soldier" is anyone who either embellishes their military career or lies about any part of their service. That said. What is the problem? Is it because Rush used the word soldiers and not soldier. I think the transcript you have posted on this site says it all. Rush was referring to people who have lied about their military service, or lack there of.
This country has more important things to worry about than some flunky millionaire behind a microphone. Why aren't we discussing a representative government that does not value or act on the wishes of those they represent. Republicans and Democrats who represent us are taking this country down. I am saddened by what the current Administration, House, and Senate are doing to MY country. These politicians (Democrat, Republican, and Independents) are destroying what this country stands for. They are destroying the entire soul of this nation. I am ashamed of the path our leaders have chosen to take MY country.
Why aren't we concerned about the fact our elected representatives are not working for the citizens of this country? Why do we keep electing the same people over and over again? When wil WE wake up and hold our elected officials accountable.
Think about this when you vote. VOTE. It is the only way they will understand we care. Otherwise they will do as the please. We must vote and let them know we are not going to put up with the same old junk anymore. Hold them accountable and make them work for us.
Rush is NOT worth wasting time on. His blind and deaf follows will continue to live their life with heads in the sand, so let them.
Rush is certainly worth any time and effort, now and always. After all, every single word he utters is sacrosanct, isn't it? If Rush says the sky is blue, and you look up and see one single, solitary, hint of a cloud, then, he must be lying, right?
David Brock, LiarA lifelong habit proves hard to break.
By Timothy Noah
great article, says alot about who's pointing the finger at Limbaugh.
It would be great if you had a post off. Have leftists posts all of the Rush anti-military stuff and have Conservatives post all of the lefts anti-military quotes. Rush is on 3 hours a day for 20 years, surely you must have found tons of anti-military quotes from him by now.
Media Matters doesn't really matter! as much as you try to twist what Rush Limbaugh said, you fail.
Rush is a truth teller and you are clearly the distributors of lies. Keep up the good work! LOL
DIRK:
It's not about Limbaugh, particularly. It's about "controlling the message."
The MEDIA for about 20 years has turned decidedly Rightwing, with the bias about which stories to run, and the bias WITHIN the stories reported, along with the "premises" which are accepted as true ALL being in favor of the Republicans.
In 2004, the BIG story was the Swift Boat Vets. Ultimately, the SBV proved absolutely nothing, did not shake the official Navy position that Kerry was a hero and a legitimate combat veteran with honorable service, BUT the SBV provided the Media with a "narrative" that served the Republicans, and "defined" Kerry in a way that lost him votes ... enough votes to make a Bush win seem possible.
Not only did "the Left" not respond "in kind" by having a message of their own to promote which might dominate the headlines (and this would NOT be anything about boring ISSUES, not in THIS Media), Kerry refused to even defend himself, believing in the "high road" of staying out of the mud would ultimately be rewarded. He was wrong, and he lost.
The last two weeks, and perhaps months to come, were SUPPOSED to be dominated by the Gen. Petraeous/BetrayUs non-story. It was PERFECT for the Rightwing Media. It (absolutely unfairly) branded all Democrats as anti-military, even anti-America, hell, PRO-terrorist! The body of the MoveOn story was never even questioned, only a headline with a QUESTION MARK. And off went the right, demanding everybody apologize and condemn the ad, having endless "panel discussions" about whether all Democrats were just clueless or intentionally vile, and all this completely obscured any reporting of REAL issues like the WAR, like Republican scandals and corruption, like information about presidential candidates or their positions.
Then, the most amazing thing happened. The Left FOUGHT BACK. The Left, led by MMFA, presented a narrative of their own, which LEGITIMATELY questioned the loyalties of the most prominent of the Conservatives, Rush Limbaugh. With facts and Limbaugh's own damning words, the Left delivered a counter punch that scored a knock-down, obscuring the "BetrayUs" discussion, and requiring Republicans and Rightwing Pundits to be endlessly ON DEFENSE and primarialy OFF MESSAGE.
For far too long, the Rightwing enjoyed a monopoly of controlling the message of the politics of personal destruction aimed at the Democratic Party and all their leaders. This campaign by the Rightwing Smear Machine and Echo-Chamber began in earnest with Bill Clinton, and has gained momentum ever since, making it seem inevitable that each day's news 24/7 would either be dominated by an ongoing narrative about Democratic anti-American behavior, or intruducing a NEW Democratic "scandal".
That dynamic has now changed, and the Rightwing has an actual fight on their hands. And they are losing BIGTIME. Limbaugh's hypocricy and arrogance helpfully supplied the story which now dominates the Media, but it's not about Limbaugh personally. It's about whether the Rightwing will dictate their message of lies, hate, smear as being what the American People hear to the exclusion of all else, or whether the American people will have a REAL CHOICE.
Whenever the American People have a REAL CHOICE, with real information and unbiased reporting, the Republicans LOSE. Without lies, hate, and smear, the Republicans have nothing.
Tex:
God gave you a brain, moron. Use it. You just parroting the lies told by discredited journalist David Brock and his dishonest band of sissies.
And how ironic that you would attack the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in a thread that dishonestly protrays what Rush Limbaugh said. SBVT is made up of 260+ real sailors who, unlike the coward John Kerry, completed their full tours in Vietnam. You have attacked 260+ Vietnam veterans who earned (as opposed to the medals Kerry "won") hundreds of medals for their valor. How dare you, you pathetic loser.
KEVIN:
Did the Swift Boat Vets manage to get the Navy to revoke any of Kerry's medals? Did they alter any of their official documents pertaining to Kerry's wartime service? No, and NO.
Ah, but WHY NOT? If, as you say, the valid "testimony" of OVER 260 soldiers was placed on the record, that would seem overwhelming probable cause to revisit Kerry's record, add all the new EVIDENCE as accounted by these SBV soldiers, and correct the mistakes of the past.
After all, it's very much in the interest of the military to assure that ALL MEDALS awarded to soldiers are believed to be valid and deserved, otherwise how could we honor the service of decorated combat vets? If the SBV stories were TRUE, then America could no longer believe that ANY military medal was valid, because the SBVs claimed Kerry got his fruadulently.
The answer is, you are lying through your teeth. Of those supposed 260 soldiers, the vast majority of them "signed on" only because they did not want Kerry the Democrat to be elected president. THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE TO ADD to the record, they had no evidence, they just wanted Kerry to lose.
Of those very few soldiers who claimed to actually KNOW something which contradicted the official record, each was examined and found to be without evidentiary basis, or was coming from proven unreliable "witnesses". The majority of those who gave their version of a story were not even in a position to witness the action first hand; all those actually ON THE BOAT with Kerry confirmed the official version of the story.
After all was said and done, the SBVs had NOTHING of substance to add, no PROOF of any of their claims, and the whole bunch of them managed to destroy their OWN credibility. Kerry remains a decorated combat veteran of wartime service and a hero, while the SBVs tried to make their case, and FAILED UTTERLY to present a single FACT that would change the record.
That you are still promoting the examined and proven bogus stories of the Swift Boat Liars identifies you as a bonafide brainless rightwing lemming and hatemonger, not to mention another rightwinger who DISHONORS THE TROOPS who served in uniform.
Your incessant use of the word "sissies" is interesting as well. I don't believe it's homophobia as much as a defense mechanism hiding a latent homosexual persuasion on your part, seen so often in Republicans who scold homosexuals while engaging in homosexual liaisons. Perhaps you are even Jeff Gannon, Mark Foley, Ted Haggert, Larry Craig, or some other "macho" Rightwing hypocrite, posting under an anonymous screenname. Certainly, THEY used terms like "sissies" for others to try to hide their true selves.
Consider some real therapy, KEVIN. Your world is falling apart, and your trauma is only going to get worse as the rightwing dissolves before our very eyes. Your stress level will surely reach dangerous levels. Seek help.
Tex:
Kerry and the SBVT WERE NOT SOLDIERS! You display your ignorance by labelling them soldiers. If you cannot get that basic fact right, why should we even consider the rest of your post?
Rush can’t seem to understand singular and plural in the English language. “soldiers” can go back and forth from plural to singular. Why should anyone continue to listen to this man!
KEVIN:
Rush Limbaugh said the following: "I was talking about a genuine phony soldier. And by the way, Jesse MacBeth's not the only one. … How about Jack Murtha blanketly accepting the notion that Marines at Haditha engaged in wanton murder of innocent children and civilians?"
Seems your hero Rush has labelled Murtha as another "phony soldier". But as you say, as a Marine, the proper internal military jargon for a Murtha would be "PHONY SAILOR". Right?
Be sure you get that correction to Rush, before he even further embarrasses himself, and thus people like you will no longer believe anything he says. And thanks for the "heads up." LOL
Tex:Good post! I knew the swiftboating of Kerry was crap from the beginning, because I served in the US Navy during the mid sixties. Serving on relatively small vessels like swiftboats, and submarines your world is mostly restricted to shipmates. I only knew about 12-15 guys not on my boat; and not very well at that! Patrols and duties occupy your time- I had 3, lasting 9-12 weeks each.
KEVIN:
Did the Swift Boat Vets manage to get the Navy to revoke any of Kerry's medals? Did they alter any of their official documents pertaining to Kerry's wartime service? No, and NO.
Not only that, the Navy Inspector General investigated and said every medal was awarded according to proper procedures and by those with authority to do so.
------------------------------------
The answer is, you are lying through your teeth. Of those supposed 260 soldiers, the vast majority of them "signed on" only because they did not want Kerry the Democrat to be elected president. THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE TO ADD to the record, they had no evidence, they just wanted Kerry to lose.
Right you are. Most didn't even serve in the same time or at the same place as Kerry.
------------------------------------------------
Of those very few soldiers who claimed to actually KNOW something which contradicted the official record, each was examined and found to be without evidentiary basis, or was coming from proven unreliable "witnesses". The majority of those who gave their version of a story were not even in a position to witness the action first hand; all those actually ON THE BOAT with Kerry confirmed the official version of the story.
Right again. Not a single one of their claims about Kerry's military service has been proven true, and in fact just about every one has been completely disproven.
-----------------------------------------------
After all was said and done, the SBVs had NOTHING of substance to add, no PROOF of any of their claims, and the whole bunch of them managed to destroy their OWN credibility. Kerry remains a decorated combat veteran of wartime service and a hero, while the SBVs tried to make their case, and FAILED UTTERLY to present a single FACT that would change the record.
An examination of their expenditures is very revealing. They had approximately $27 million to spend, and how much was spent on actual research...research, not just calling up vets and trying to get them to badmouth Kerry? As far as I can see, it was a few thousand, reimbursements to chatroom participants who went down and looked through the archives.
They were able to spend millions on TV ads and media appearances. They paid their media and political consultants hundreds of thousands of dollars. They spent over $130,000 to take themselves to Disney World.
And how much to hire military archivists or research experts? Or even someone who knew how to read an after action report? Close to zero as far as I can tell.
Which tells you how much they were interested in getting at the "truth," doesn't it?
How do you know those 260 (actually more like 250) sailors all completed one year tours of VN?
Tex, I can agree with everything that you say, BUT will that help to unify and strengthen our country? The wierd right will eventually fade away. I think there are bigger fish to fry.
DIRK:
A fair point, but I would respond, is a BODY strengthened when a cancer is removed? The operation is unpleasant, and consumes some time, but is ultimately vital. A cancer will seldom go away by itself.
There ARE bigger fish to fry, but that crackle you hear is Rush and Bill getting their hush-puppies singed. Once they flee the lake to nurse their wounds, the fishing can begin in earnest. Sadly, up 'til today, their incessant TALKING has kept the big fish away.
Getting out of "analogy" mode, I would submit that the Rightwing Media as a whole has offered protection to our current government, impeding scrutiny and refusing to hold this administration accountable. The Rightwing Media ... to INCLUDE the networks, the New York Times, and others who have for years unquestioningly presented White House spin as "truth" and "news" ... stands in the way of a proper and informed democracy (which demands an educated and properly informed populous), and until the obstructionism of this biased press is removed, the "big fish" will continue to avoid the frying pan (ah, back to that analogy!).
This is vitally important work MMFA is doing. To downplay its seriousness is to misunderstand the scope of the problem.
Tex:
You must be using some serious drugs. You're delusional.
KEVIN:
Seek help. Seriously.
You forgot to call him a sissy.
Wake up and smell the irony
Kevin1007--of all people--has accused Tex of being a moron (above) and of being delusional (here).
The scary thing is that he's serious. And this is why people like him simply can't be reasoned with.
Text,
I agree that this work of exposing the truth does matter. What matters very little is Media Matters(vl) itself. This will fire up the far lefties (is there any other kind) and give them the belief that the candidates who court you will actually stay with you. When it comes to elections, the left has to run away from y'all to have any chance of winning. Interesting, when a strong conservative runs, they usually stay true to their values throughout the election.
That's why I hope that Hillary, Osama, Richard, John or whomever is nominated by the democrat party, relishes the 'true liberal' banner, doesn't move away from what they are saying now and let the voters decide. That is why I hope the debates about the perspective of the left continues to see the light of day and make the choices the country very clear.
"That's why I hope that Hillary, Osama, Richard, John or whomever is nominated by the democrat party..."
Richard who?
For the first time ever PC puts a little morsel of truth in one of his posts:
"the far lefties (is there any other kind) "
This is what the nutbag right believes, that anyone who isn't one hudred percent on board with their plans to destroy this country is a far left wacko. To them, there is no position so far to the right that it would be considered radical or extreme and yet even the most centrist of liberals is a far left loon.
It is time to remove this small cadre of plutocrats, supply siders and warmongers from all positions of power and let real debate take place. There can be no hope of honest discourse and reasonable compromise as long as the extreme right continues to claim to be the center.
I consider myself am an independent voter and thinker. So bringing balance and accuracy to news reporting is critical in these times of bias and tendentious commentaries and articles in the print and electronic media. It appears that Russ Limbaugh may have crossed the line attacking the integrity and patriotism of some Democratic war veterans. However, it still remains unclear why some of his barbs and stinging observations may, indeed, have a basis in veracity. For example, Senator John Kerry has until this time refused to release all his Navy records during the Vietnam war. Which begs the following question: What is Kerry hiding? This is one major reason the Swift Board veterans gained traction against him during the 2004 election. Like them, I am still waiting for Kerry to exonerate himself. Likewise, the background and circumstances surrounding Max Cleland war wounds and Senator Harkin's actual war role as a real combatant are factually disputable and controversial. To quote Hannah Arendt. "let the greater truth prevail."
Bill
I caught the homosexual Bill Maher on HBO last night. He said he was tired of the "miracle baby" stories in which U.S. troops save Iraqi children.
According to the sissy Maher, it is a miracle when our troops do not bash in the heads of Iraqi children.
Where are the MMFA sissies on this one? Maher unfairly accused our troops of murder and David Brock and his fellow MMFA sissies are silent.
I challenge the sissies with MMFA to meet with me and my fellow Marines to discuss what Limbaugh really said.
Keven, you clearly are a disturbed individual. BTW, it's pretty sissy to come on an anonomious website and call other anonomious people sissies.ROTFLMAO!!
Kevin said: "I challenge the sissies with MMFA to meet with me and my fellow Marines to discuss what Limbaugh really said."
and
"Any time the sissies at MMFA are ready to discuss what Limbaugh really said, my fellow Marines and I will be there."
I've got a son that's a Marine, and he's as liberal as the day is long. Please stop appropriating the entire Marine Corps for your own ideological arguments.
This bears Repeating ...
"Your incessant use of the word "sissies" is interesting as well. I don't believe it's homophobia as much as a defense mechanism hiding a latent homosexual persuasion on your part, seen so often in Republicans who scold homosexuals while engaging in homosexual liaisons. Perhaps you are even Jeff Gannon, Mark Foley, Ted Haggert, Larry Craig, or some other "macho" Rightwing hypocrite, posting under an anonymous screenname. Certainly, THEY used terms like "sissies" for others to try to hide their true selves." -TEX-
Kevin honestly, you should take advantage of your VA Hospital Benefits concerning your anger and hatred. It can't hurt and it's free.
I've never been a sissy in my life and now i've been called a "Phoney Soldier" by Rush. I fought for his freedom to do that but I just return the favor to him ...
A ChickenHawk Coward who's tired of carrying that nasty water for RepubliCan'ts. I'm not mad or angy. I'm determined! To take back our country in 08. Mark you calender Kevin, for that is when you and Republicans will stop and say ...
GOD! ... What did we do wrong?
I'd rather be one of your SISSIES than the Cowardly Rush LimpBrain.
If you didn't serve in the military and then claimed to have done so, then, yes, you are one of the phony soldiers Rush talked about.
Bull Corn Kevin ...
It doesn't matter what Rush said about that.
You should be ashammed of yourself for defending that dishonest water carrier. He even admitted that himself when Republicans lost the Senate and the House.
What does matter is the FACT that he's abused Hagel, Murtha, Myself and many others who've proudly served this country in foreign wars. A cowardly man that never served isn't qualified to be broadcasting to our troops.
That's why I recieved mail from more reliable sources when serving.
"I challenge the sissies with MMFA ..."
Pantywaists!
Sure, that's happen.. immediately after Rush has the courage to apologuze to the soldiers he smeared as phony.
Kevin seems to have this need to call anyone he disagrees with a sissy and a homo. Has calling people names become an argument?
Um, Bill Maher has a reputation of being somewhat of a womanizer. I doubt very much you are a "real" marine, because "real" marines would have more honor then to label someone as a homsexual, simply because of what they said on TV. AND you should be really ashamed that you idolize a lying, junkie, bigot who puffs on a big cigar spouting pariotism while condemming free speech.
Bill Maher surrounds himself with younger women way out of his league to disguise his homosexuality.
And Marine is a proper noun. You show disrespect with the lowercase "m."
You seem to be pretty obsessed with sissy and homo-talk. Hmmm.
Maybe staying on the subject of Rushs' inability to take responsibility for his mistakes is a little "hard" for a jarhead.
MGHAMMA:
MMFA has my actual name and e-mail. I've challenged the MMFA sissies to meet with me and my fellow Marines to discuss what Limbaugh really said and at whom his comments were directed. I have yet to hear from Brock and his band of sissies.
That makes no sense meat head. MMFA just put up Rush's transcript. What are you so puffed up about anyway...are you made because Rush's respect of the military is so conditional or because he continues to lie about it.
The only liars here are the discredited journalist David Brock, his fellow sissies at MMFA, and the moonbats who parrot them without actually checking the facts.
If being wrong or lying makes you a "sissy" then I think that Donald Rumpsfeld, Dick Chaney and W. Bush should do the manly thing and fess up to their sissyness.
If not facing your enimies makes you a sissy I would hope that W. Bush, after leaving office would head out to Afganistan and find Bin Laden, dead or alive.
If getting bin Laden were an easy thing to do, Bill Clinton would have gotten him. He had eight whole years. Clinton couldn't even capture Eric Rudolph and he was right here in our country.
You have already established that half the US population is suspect of being sissy traitors and obviously clinton is among them. Forget about them. Besides Clinton is irrelevent. What about George W. Bush! What about Rush Lindbauh! Hannity! Chaney!
And if our very way of life is threatened by Islamic extremist, why didn't the manly non sissy republicans:
1. Instituted a draft - a real surge!
2. go on a wartime economy - rationing, conversion of industry to military production
3. Go after war profiteers who are making millions at our expense.
NO fearless leader W. told us after 9-11 that we should do a very sissy thing for our country: Go out shopping!
TEMP:
He's "puffed up" because the Rightwing are being beat at their own game. The MESSAGE has Republicans on the defensive, and this in a new experience for Kevin. He's obviously livid, in a rage, sputtering and lashing out, trying desperately to deny anything has changed.
It's sad to watch a person whose world is falling apart, pulling with futility on the hands of time, trying to turn back the clock to that happier time when the Rightwing controlled the message of smearing Democrats, with no opposition whatsoever. That time has gone.
Kevin
" band of sissies ..."
Scaredy-cats!
Gee I watched Bill Maher too. I guess your feed is filtered through your tinfoil hat, because thats not the words I heard. But then thats what I expect from a ditto-fascist.
Oh and as to your "challenge". Will that be at your regular steambath meeting of wannabe Spartans? You excessively macho queens always amuse me.
I really wish that our current Military was allowed by law, ( I KNOW THEY ARE NOT ATM ), to take a vote on if "THEY", the ones actualy fighting and dying, believe in the mission in Iraq, a SECRET vote, so NO reprisals, no issues... I wonder what the vote would be ? If they could really, honestly tell us all here in America what they feel and want. Based soly on NON-FACTUAL data on the way the United States Military votes in elections, I bet the vast majority would support the current mission and choose to be there and continue to fight. i have NO way to back that up, but my opinion is it would be about 70% in favor & 30 % apposed... But we will never know, and if they could vote and the Dems had the proof that those that are serving WANT TO BE THERE, WANT TO CONTINUE, would the Libs then support the war ?
MGARNETT:
The military are both goal and action oriented. When thinking about their current mission, they believe ... and are correct ... that they are doing the best job possible, they WANT to believe that their mission is vital to the national security of America, and they always wish to complete every mission with VICTORY.
A more useful poll would be one which asked questions about how they rate their current civilian leadership, the Bush White House.
Do they feel as if they are being treated fairly, with their tours being re-upped multiple times without any "down time" at home? Do they feel they have been equipped properly with equipment to protect them in the field? Do they believe there might be other more effective ways to fight terrorism, rather than just the war in Iraq? Do they believe their leadership has made proper decisions, such as disbanding the Iraq Army, or allowing huge ammo dumps to go unprotected immediately following the invasion, allowing insurgents to make off with tons of ordinance? Do those tasked with handling prisoners believe that their chain of command is properly accepting responsibility for the actions the troops are asked to perform?
Such questions would give a better picture of how our soldiers really feel about their current mission in Iraq, and their evaluation of the leadership they have seen, so far.
Our duty, as American citizens, is to do our dead-level best to provide our military with competent, intelligent, and diligent civilian leadership which gives our soldiers top priority when it comes to troop levels for missions, equipment, and valid rationale for their missions. With GW Bush, the nation FAILED our soldiers. (Actually, THE PEOPLE voted in majority for the OTHER guy. It's the Supreme Court that put us in this mess. It's the five conservatives on the Supreme Court who FAILED our military fighting men and women.)
I really wish that our current Military was allowed by law, ( I KNOW THEY ARE NOT ATM ), to take a vote on if "THEY", the ones actualy fighting and dying, believe in the mission in Iraq, a SECRET vote, so NO reprisals, no issues... I wonder what the vote would be ? If they could really, honestly tell us all here in America what they feel and want. Based soly on NON-FACTUAL data on the way the United States Military votes in elections, I bet the vast majority would support the current mission and choose to be there and continue to fight. i have NO way to back that up, but my opinion is it would be about 70% in favor & 30 % apposed... But we will never know, and if they could vote and the Dems had the proof that those that are serving WANT TO BE THERE, WANT TO CONTINUE, would the Libs then support the war?
-------------------------------------------
Actually, we DO have ways of knowing what they feel and want, with information provided in secrecy and with no fear of reprisals. They're called surveys.
Military Times has conducted annual polls of active duty military. The responses to the last poll, in Dec. 2006, may surprise you:
"Only 35 percent of the military members polled this year said they approve of the way President Bush is handling the war, while 42 percent said they disapproved.
...
Just as telling, in this year’s poll only 41 percent of the military said the U.S. should have gone to war in Iraq in the first place, down from 65 percent in 2003. That closely reflects the beliefs of the general population today — 45 percent agreed in a recent USA Today/Gallup poll."
http://www.militarycity.com/polls/2006_main.php
EECEE:
Vital to a "VICTORY" in Iraq is to win the hearts and minds of the citizens there. We are supposedly NOT a conquering army, but a LIBERATING army, and Iraq will (supposedly) eventually be turned over to the Iraqis. That's where hearts and minds come in: We wish, for our national security interests, for Iraq to adopt governance MORE LIKE OURS.
Bush has two gargantuan problems with this task.
FIRST, Bush knows only how to ALIENATE the hearts and minds of a people. Bush started out with approval ratings in the 90's, they are now, after he's had a couple of years to show what he can do and what kind of man he really is, in the 20's. He has LOST the hearts and minds of the American people, HIS OWN people. How does this translate to any expertise in winning hearts and minds anywhere else?
SECOND, becoming "MORE LIKE US" is extremely problematic with the Bush Administration as the model. To be "more like the USA", a foreign nation now has to attack other nations pre-emptively and based on "evidence" that is false. To be "like us", a foreign nation has to imprison people with no regard to civil rights, no right to due process, no charges filed against them, no way to prove their innocence. To be "like us", foreign nations have to approve the TORTURE of any prisoners, and to abandon any hint that they intend to follow the Geneva Conventions or international law. To be "like us", a foreign nation has to eliminate individual rights for their own citizens, cancelling any FREEDOMS guaranteed in a Constitution in favor of government spying on their own citizens (for one example), in the name of "security". And a foreign nation, to emulate the Bush Administration, has to operate in as complete SECRECY as can be engineered.
In short, a nation striving to be "more like the USA" today, thanks to GW BUSH, would more resemble NAZI GERMANY than any kind of freedom-loving nation with liberty as a primary principle.
If another nation started to behave as BUSH has THIS nation behaving, we would label that nation a human rights violator and a rogue lawless nation, headed by an unaccountable dictator. They'd be JUST LIKE THE USA today!
We hear from and see on TV from the left ALL the time the soldiers that have fought in Iraq that do NOT support the War... When will we see the ones that do ? Or do you folks believe that there are NO soldiers that support the effort and are willing to die to continue the mission.
For those on the MoveOn far left, i bet it would not make any difference if the numbers PROVED that the vast majority want to fight, want to continue, do not want to re-deploy... For those few on the FAR left that want America to lose the war "for the good of the world", it would not matter at all... Shouldn't the ones actualy fighting and dying have a say ?
Almost 19% of Dems say they want America to lose, to surrender, to retreat, to run away, to quit, to cowar in the corner, to re-deploy... SAD...
FOX News Poll: Nearly 1 in 5 Democrats Say World Will Be Better Off if U.S. Loses WarThursday, October 04, 2007
By Dana Blanton
NEW YORK — Nearly one out of every five Democrats thinks the world will be better off if America loses the war in Iraq, according to the FOX News Opinion Dynamics Poll released Thursday.
The percentage of Democrats (19 percent) who believe that is nearly four times the number of Republicans (5 percent) who gave the same answer. Seven percent of independents said the world would be better off if the U.S. lost the war.
Click here for results of the poll.(pdf)
Overall, 11 percent of Americans think the world would be "better off" if the U.S. lost the war, and 73 percent disagree.
Opinion Dynamics Corp. conducted the national telephone poll of 900 registered voters for FOX News from Sept. 25 to Sept. 26. The poll has a 3-point margin of error
***btw: I'm sure since this is a Fox Nes poll some left leaners will say it is a lie... It's not, 19% of Dems hate America this much that they would actualy want us all to lose a war... It's a good thing that real Democrates and Republicans durning WWII did not feel that way or we'd be speaking Japoaneese or German right now. Where have the real Dems that love and fought for this country gone ?
How about that. Twenty percent of Democrats want our troops to lose in Iraq, yet the pathetic sissies with MMFA want to lie about what Limbaughsaid about our troops.
Come on, Brock. My fellow Marines and I would like to have a serious dicussion with you and your band of sissies who are lying about Limbaugh. Let's set up a time so we can settle this matter once and for all.
So only 19% actually admitted it?
I wonder how many people who voted for George W. Bush in 2004 wanted us to loose the war. Even then his track record was pretty obvious.
That was an interesting poll. I especially liked how they phrased the question - placing emphasis on losing. No one wants to lose. What do you think would happen if they phrased it differently? A USA Today/Gallup poll found that 59% of Americans favor setting a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq and sticking to it. I guess 59% of Americans hate America.
For the record, the world will be a better place when America withdraws its troops from Iraq.
First of all, anyone who is willing to answer a question couched in such stupid,undefineable terms as "losing" a war - not to mention questions about whether they pray for GWB - has judgment issues to begin with.
Second, you don't mention that 12% of Republicans and Independents answered the question the same way. Out of the 900 respondents sampled, that means approximately 17 more Democrats than Republicans or Independents answered that way.
Yeah, that is one significant poll.
Correction - approximately 14 more Dems than Reps or Independents answered the question that way.
Anything FOX does is to put down on Democrats. The war is a republican problem and the way to get out of it is to call Dems stupid names and make stupid assertions. Anyone listening to fox crap has no credibility in political discussions.
http://vets4victory.com/
Great (and accurate) cartoon:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/10/018673.php
Notice how they stfu when we show them and every person who comes here both Lib & Cons the poll results showing how much the far left HATE America... If EVER in our 200+ year history this had been said or discoverd, the Commie Lib Dems would have been trried for sedition or treason... President Kenedy would be appaled at todays we want to lose Dems. Can you even imagine if the Dem had said this durning WWII...
American haters are being discoverd, and the spotlight is clearly on the Lib Dems, this next election is about ALOT more then just Hilary... And I believe as more and more people of ALL walks of life, of ALL faiths, of ALL parties come to realize that a large part of the FAR LEFT wants a US defeat, the country will vote for AMERICA to win, for a Republican who will fight.
And what are we supposed to do with all these traitors and haters?
Obviously you hate the idea that there is any opposition in this country. This sounds like Stalin and Hitler time to me.
I guess the next non-sissy heterosexual thing to do is to start rounding up liberals for processing/reeducation. Those that don't turn can be delt with in other ways.
AND ONE OTHER THING: Your post is consistent with the idea that anyone, including soldiers, that speak out against the war must be aligned with the traiter/sissies. This would be consistent with your hero Rush limgaugh's phony soldierS message.
If I read the transcript (posted here) correctly. the caller said, in effect, the media "never talks to real soldiers" to which Rash replies "phony soldiers". And the whole thing builds from there. Is that a fact or fiction? Sure, Rash probably set it up, scripted in a way. But unless the caller is actually Rash, I could see where he was actually the first to say "phoney soldiers" (in different words).
It's been a great week, Congress has been so busy with the MoveOn ad and this flap, they didn't have time to get much else done (except for the fingerpointing over the SCHIP veto). Going to be a great 13 months leading up to the first Tuesday next November.
Keep this story going MM you are doing a great job.Not only are you exposing the blow hard Limbaugh for the immoral lying coward that he undeniably is,you are also exposing his rabid bug eyed "proud" fans for the gullible nitwits that THEY undeniably are.They swarm around this site,desperately defending a shameless degenerate drug addicted sex tourist,even while the "President" (unelected twice)he "carries the water"for,drags a once great country into abysmal tyranny and international shame.It is MM that must continue to hold these unspeakable weasels accountable.
Slaplois,
Than you for the wonderfully insightful diatribe. I agree that Media Matters (very little) MUST keep this story going. When Americans can see clearly the belief system of the left and the demokrat party and judge if those values are what they want for themselves. I'm hoping that MM(vl) and bowelmovement.org continues to expose themselves to the light of day!
im just curious.
why would you listen to a man who admitted that he lied to his audience for years?
he lied about his drug abuse, he lied about his support for the republican congress (the now famous water carrier quote), he lied about his draft deferrment (said it was school related, when he had dropped out after a semester) he has lied about being profamily (hard to be profamily when you cant hold down a marriage and take sex trips to south america).
so seriously....how do you take him and his words seriously?
oh, and we have already won the war. sadaam is gone, there are no wmds, the iraqis had 2 elections, they have a constitution.
we cant win the peace or the occupation.
so bring our troops home, and redeploy some to where they are needed to fight the real terrorists...like in afghanistan.
The real "sissy" isn't David Brock. The sissies are O'Reilly and Limbaugh. Limbaugh and O'Reilly ducked out of serving in Vietnam--Rush with his butt boil and O'Reilly by becoming a teacher. O'Reilly is a sissy since he refused to let Brock or anyone else from MMFA come on his show. He know they would own his butt!
If getting a draft deferment makes someone a sissy, what is Bill Clinton, who is a veritable draft dodger? Clinton had a draft induction date and got out of it by promising to serve in the ROTC. He reneged on that commitment.
I'm certain that O'Reilly invited MMFA to appear on his shows, just as Limbaugh had invited Pinky Reid to appear on his. Brock and Reid are too big of sissies to accept the invitations.
I've also invited the MMFA sissies to meet with my fellow Marines and me to discuss their lies about Limbaugh. They haven't accepted the invitation.
I believe clinton WAS labeled a "sissy" by his opposition for not serving. I remember it was a big issue, especially for the likes of Rush back in the day. Now we have a new crop of "sissys" who happen to be conservative republican, and who are beyond reproach by definition.
By the way, you seem obsessed with masculinity and the lack there of. I don't know if you realize it but it comes off as insecurity and as an obsession with all things male. I would never assume anything, although if this is the case the brave thing to do is to honestly examine who you are and accept the results. Denile is for sissies.
If you think David Brock is a paragon of masculinity, that says a great deal about you.
He faced up to who he was and what he did. He is who he is. I am sure you have read his books and know what I am talking about.
EB:
Yes, but when will he face up to what he is today, i.e., a cowardly sissy who smears others for Hillary Clinton?
Uh - calling people you don't agree with "sissy" is also a smear. Calling democrats/liberals anti military is a smear...
Rush / Bo / hannity / smear all the time. MMA quotes what they say. If they don't want what they said repeated, they shouldn't say it. If people get confused by what they say, they should be more clear. They are in the communication business after all.
I double triple dare you to call me a sissy, big guy.
I have called the David Brock and MMFA sissies.
You moonbats are so mentally ill that you accept lies from David Brock even when you know that it was Brock's lies that ultimately led to the impeachment of Bill Clinton.
Some points:
1. I guess I am not a sissy then. I was beginning to worry
2. so the impeachment of Bill clinton was the result of lies which came from the conservatives including Rush and yes Brock. Note: Rush also was a part of the lies that smeared clinton. Check him off for the sissy column.
3. You are a sissy by your own definition. You called people on this site mentally ill. That is a smear and by your own definition, that puts you in the sissy category.
4. MMFA posts whaconservative media people say and allow comment and analysis. Rush and co. just spin their opinions of who is naughty and nice and do not offer a forum for rebuttle. You get on their do do list and that it.
5. Rush distorts and lies. Its well documented and not just here.
EB:
You're an ideal Democrat voter. You can't think and you're easily fooled.
It was Brock's lie concerning Paula Jones that compelled her to come forth with her allegation concerning Clinton. If Brock had not told that lie, is it likely that Clinton would not have been impeached.
You cannot cite an example of anything Limbaugh said that led to Clinton's impeachment. It is simply a lie to say Limbaugh had anything to do with that.
What more can expect from group of people who happily call themselves dittoheads other than child like name calling and school yard bulling .How typical and how and completely predictable.
What a load of convenient lib lies and distortion.
If anyone is REALLY interested ins omething called the TRUTH on this NON STORY, you can start with Brian Ross on ABC NEWS on Sept. 24th. It was Ross who coined the "phony soldiers" comment. And then, the next day - Sept 25 - on his morning update - Rush commented on this AND the Jesse Macbeth (oh no sorry, it's really Jesse Adam Al-Zaid) TRUTH.
So the total lies that the left nut libs are trying to create about this is another example of how worried libs truly are!
When will Kerry apologise to me for his comments whilst I wa a member of A Co. 159th Avn Bn, 101st Abn Div, 1971?
When will Murtha apologise to the Marine "butchers" acquited?
When will we realise how terribly stupid this arguement is. Limbaugh is a straw man, not the issue. I thought it was fascism's objective to crush speech, not the left's.
How many of us have actually been in combat? How many of us have actually stuffed kids in body bags? Limbaugh said this, Savage is a cretin, etc., you've got to do better than that.
When will our hearts ache for the treatment of coalition prisoners? Anit-war does not equate with pro-fundamentalism. While anti-war, it strikes me as odd that the left is so terrible in an uproar about the forces of reactionarism (you know, the burqua, the treatment of gays, the treatment of apostates) being supressed. My anti-war views and committment are faith-based, not political.
I'm a Mahayana Buddhist, vegetarian, pro-life, anti-death penalty, anti-war (actually did time back in the day), registered liberatiran, Republican by ben, fiscal conservative, social liberal. Nobody likes me.
What a load of convenient lib lies and distortion. If anyone is REALLY interested ins omething called the TRUTH on this NON STORY, you can start with Brian Ross on ABC NEWS on Sept. 24th. It was Ross who coined the "phony soldiers" comment. And then, the next day - Sept 25 - on his morning update - Rush commented on this AND the Jesse Macbeth (oh no sorry, it's really Jesse Adam Al-Zaid) TRUTH. So the total lies that the left nut libs are trying to create about this is another example of how worried libs truly are!
Golly everyone did you hear, Kevin is a MARINE!
I am curious what does Kevin being a MARINE, have to do with anything, being discussed on this board? I do notice that he insist on inviting everyone to meet with him and his MARINES. Most Marines I know wouldn't need backup they would want to meet someone one on one, unless of course he's.....nevermind!!! I'm sure he's a ruff and tuff MARINE, and a legend in his own mind.
All the spin the Rushbots have put on this is amazing. They evidently object to the fact that MM post what Rush says, with a link to the audio because it's not fair somehow.
They then object to the fact that MM didn't post the part of the conversation mentioning that "Hero of the Left" Jesse, who I and no one I know has ever heard of, when the mention came after a full minute and a half about a totally different topic about how we REALLY DID FIND WMD'S.
It is fair however for Rush to edit a clip, declare it to be the FULL trancript because the conversation about WMD's in not relevent and to long for MSM to play. LOL
It gives me a WTF moment.
Rushbot arguments reminds me of the old Richard Pryor joke about the man whose wife catches him in bed with another woman and he looks at her and says "Who you going to believe! Me or your lying eyes?
Speaking of Marines. Anyone heard the reason Marines are stationed on Naval vessels?
Hubble:
" I do notice that he insist on inviting everyone to meet with him and his MARINES. Most Marines I know wouldn't need backup they would want to meet someone one on one, unless of course he's.....nevermind!!!"
The sissies with MMFA are not "everyone."
"They evidently object to the fact that MM post what Rush says, with a link to the audio because it's not fair somehow."
We object to the sissies with MMFA taking Limbaugh's words out of context and lying about what Limbaugh said.
"They then object to the fact that MM didn't post the part of the conversation mentioning that "Hero of the Left" Jesse, who I and no one I know has ever heard of, when the mention came after a full minute and a half about a totally different topic about how we REALLY DID FIND WMD'S."
Actually, Limbaugh discussed MacBeth the day before his phony troops comment. If you had not heard of him before MMFA posted their lies about Limbaugh, may I suggest that you stop getting your news exclusively from MMFA? The MacBeth story was covered by the mainstream media before Rush reported on it.
"Speaking of Marines. Anyone heard the reason Marines are stationed on Naval vessels?"
Try giving the punchline at the VFW or American Legion, sissy.
The sissies with MMFA are not "everyone."
Let me clarify Kevin finds it necassary to inform all of the "sissies" at MMFA that he is a rough and tough Jarrine. Of course in the course of my life I have found that most of the REAL Marines I have known don't have to constantly point it out, they are secure enough in who they are without having too. Which makes some wonder about YOU!
try giving the punchline at the VFW or American Legion, sissy.
I have I joined the VFW after I returned from Viet Nam. They laughed because real MARINES, know how to take a joke, they are secure enough in who they are to not let humor upset them, which is another reason I'm not really convinced about YOU!
If you are a real Marine you should know the punchline, and I'll give you a clue it's not "So the sailors will have someone to dance with".
So Lush talked about Macbeth the day before, and? What does that have to do with anything?
STRAWS!! STRAWS FOR SALE!!! ANYONE? ANYONE? The cons have lots and lots of straws for sale.
For God's sake please don't read the transcripts because unless you listen to Lush everyday and can follow the conversation from times past you can't possible understand that the context of the conversation today. Now drink you koolaide everyone and order you Lush Limprod secret decoder ring so you to can understand what you thought Lush said is not at all what Lush said.
Now comes the part were Kevin comes back with a veiled threat about him and his "Marines" meeting up with me. ROTFLMAO I'm so scared, really, really I am!
Thank you very much for setting "big man" Kevin straight!I think you called his bluff.
LOISLAP:
I've always been straight. The sissies at MMFA and most of their fans cannot say the same thing.
Hey Kev,
Ive been lurking on this site for a couple of days. You seem to have lost sight of the story. I kind of get the idea that you think MMFA is a nest of sissies. In fact you might be embarrassed if you go back and count how many times you've used that or some other pejorative (look it up) in your quest to be annoying.
Since you have nothing but noise to support your claims, maybe its time to admit that Limbaugh smeared combat veterans, then go back to the bathhouse and hang with the boys.
"The sissies at MMFA..."
Those, those ... cream puffs!
Kevin's Larry Craig moment.
"I am not gay. I never have been gay."
Hubble:
"Now comes the part were Kevin comes back with a veiled threat about him and his "Marines" meeting up with me. ROTFLMAO I'm so scared, really, really I am! "
Are you a moron? Is there any reason you cannot read English? Unless you're one of the MMFA sissies, I have not invited you to meet with me.
If you cannot read basic English, it's no wonder that you're so gullible that you believe the lies discredited journalist David Brock and his band of sissies tell here.
Oh God, where to start.
First off, remember that immediately prior to talking to this guy, Limbaugh made the following comment to a caller who talked about bringing home the troops and described himself as someone who "used to be military" :
"I, by the way, used to walk on the moon."
In other words, he was calling the guy a phony soldier.
Then he has an exchange with a caller who wants to specifically "retort" to the previous caller and the idea of bringing home the troops. Then he says, "and they never talk to the real soldiers... ." Rushbo's response: "The phony soldiers."
As to only talking about supposed vets making up stories about atrocities, nothing in this exchange or the one immediately prior had anything to do with claims of atrocities. It had everything to do with who was calling for bringing the troops home.
His own words prove him a liar.
" In other words, he was calling the guy a phony soldier."
The caller had made comments that indicated that he was not truly a veteran.
Kevin dude, just admit it. Its ok! Since the soldiers disagree with Rush and W. Bush we need to question everything else about them. It does not matter that they will take a bullit for their country. They are fake, phony, traitors. THEY ARE SISSIES!!!!
It is rediculous for you to defend rush by actually backing up the media matters quote. "Phony soldiers" IS the message of the right wing so called patriotic blow hards: That a good half of the country are traitors and sissies - phony Americans if you will. Such phonyness does not go away just because you are in the military. Why won't you guys be honest and just agree with Rush. You are halfway there, fellah. We are all sissy, which I am sure is a very strong charge.
EB:
Your numerous spelling errors betray an inferior mind. I believe this is why you're so easily swayed by Media Matters' lies.
Your numerous spelling errors betray an inferior mind.
As opposed to your errors in fact and logic, I suppose.
I believe this is why you're so easily swayed by Media Matters' lies.
Not one of which you've ever managed to produce. Not very manly of you there, Kevin.
Just out of curiosity, did you choose "1007" in your moniker because you set back rational thought about a thousand years?
In your delusional mind.
"The caller had made comments that indicated that he was not truly a veteran."
Which comments were those? Be specific.
Limbaugh's draft deferment was for his "anal cyst." Cheney had "better things to do." Like build his resume. Sadly, Coulters father did not flush her down the toilet in a condom & it is rumored that Hannity was rescued from the abortion clinic by a Radical Right Winger to whom he owes undying loyalty...geeze!
Those people really believed they have polished the art of 'reverse psychology' but that ploy only works on the gullible and naive. It worked for them during the past two General Elections...but in todays world citizens see through it...and are tired of the daily bashings.
Fox would do well to fire Sean Hannity. Clear channel would do the Country a tremendous favor by cramming Limbaugh's "golden EIB microphone" up his cyst infected anus. By the way did you know that the use of Oxycontin results in hearing loss. Being a druggie resulted in the greatest loss of Limbaugh's life...the ability to hear his own voice.
As for O'Reilley the "blow fish" of Fox...he needs to go outside 3 times daily and deflate his head.
Aileen Bailey
Clearwater, Florida
Try giving the punchline at the VFW or American Legion, sissy.
So who were you talking to when you wrote that? Is there another punchline that should be given at the VFS or American Legion that I missed? Another "sissy" you are referring to?
I believe, unless you mentioned yesterday in another conversation about another sissy, with another joke that you did indeed call me a sissy. Now to be fair you didn't specifically call me a MMFA sissy, and of course I have yet to recieve my official Lush Limprod secret decoder ring and my years supply of Lush approved Oxycotin/Lithium laced Koolaide, but most reasonable people could conclude that you have lumped me in with the other sissies here a MMFA.
you're so gullible that you believe the lies discredited journalist David Brock and his band of sissies tell here.
I would rather believe someone who admits what he was, has apologized and tried to reform his ways, than the pompous self rightious ramblings of your hero, a 3 time married, drug addled,Doctor shopping, Viagra popping, child prostitute capital visiting, lard ass like Lush.
When has Brock apologized to Paula Jones? It was his lie about her that ultimately led to Clinton's impeachment.
Brock was a liar during the 1990s and he is a liar today. We conservatives understand that. You liberals are too stupid to realize you're being had.
I'm sorry but I must ask you, Kevin when you wrote
Unless you're one of the MMFA sissies, I have not invited you to meet with me.
What exactly does that mean? Is this some sort of Jeff Gannon thing? After all why would a rough and tough 'Marine" want to meet up with just "sissys"?
Most Marines I know wouldn't waste the time or energy trying to prove they are more manly than a bunch of limp wrist panty waste sissies, UNLESS!!!!
Is there something we should know Kevin, where would you like to meet with these "sissys", perhaps a nice mens room?
I've listened to Rush Limbaugh ever since I was scanning through the channels one day and gave him a chance. I thought, "This guy's got it right!" He was saying most of what I was already thinking. He just knows how to articulate it. You people don't have any idea who Rush really is, or maybe DO and are just using smear-tactics. Rush was simply talking about stories that have come out lately about soldiers who are portraying themselves falsely, NOT about soldiers who disagree with the Iraq war. Media Matters OUGHT to be warning people about THEMSELVES! You can't continue to slander people and take people out of context and get away with it.
Are you guys STILL on this Rush Limbaugh story? Good Lord. Move On.
Hubble:
We all know you want to be David Brock's Monica Lewnsky. Just be careful when he pulls out his cigar, moron.
We all know you want to be David Brock's Monica Lewnsky. Just be careful when he pulls out his cigar, moron.
Oh Kevin you say the sweetest things, but I must point out I have never offered to meet with David Brock or have I ever showed an interest in meeting with just the "sissy's" of MMFA. You sir on the other hand have specifically stated that
Unless you're one of the MMFA sissies, I have not invited you to meet with me.
Sounds a little weird to me. Why the obsession on inviting "Sissie's" to meet with you. Exactly what would a manly man like yourself intend to do when you met with a MMFA sissy?
Is this some, I'm going to show the "sissy" what a real man I am by beating up someone smaller weaker and less skilled in the defensive arts than myself, which I must say just proves what brave guys your and your "Marines" are because we all know it takes a REAL man to pick on "sissies", or is it more of a I want to spend a few "Larry Craig" moments with a "sissy", not that your gay or anything.
So what is it am I a MMFA sissy that you and your "Marines" would like to meet or am I not? Unfortunately for you I have been called a lot of names in my life, but I don't recall being called a "sissy", but I will certainly let you decide on whether you and your "Marines" would like to meet up with me.
I'm just curious about why you only want to meet up with sissies.
I'm not saying it, but some would say that someone who only wants to meet up with sissies, is either a closet gay or a coward who only picks on people smaller and weaker than themselves to feel good about themselves. In other words they are gay or cowardly bullies. Especially someone who needs to "meet" with the "sissies" with a group of his "Marines".
I served with a lot of Marines and unless the Corp has changed dramatically over the years, the Marines I knew didn't run in gangs picking on sissies.
Oh and Kevin when you call me a moron, that's just being deliberately hurtful and not at all productive to a serious conversation.
I'm sure that you would not appreciate it if I were to call you a phony windbag idiot, who is a arm chair chicken-hawk in pee stained tidy whitey underwear, puffing on large cigars while you fantasize about doing perverse things to MMFA sissies. Not that I would ever resort to name calling like that, because that would be unproductive and just plain wrong.
HUBBLE:
"I'm just curious about why you only want to meet up with sissies."
I clearly stated numerous times that we would meet to discuss MMFA's lies about Rush Limbaugh. I don't know how to make it any plainer. moron.
I do find it ironic that in a thread in which MMFA lies about Limbaugh and "phony soldiers," the moonbats here are actually attacking those who have served. It shows the world what you moonbats really think of the military, doesn't it?
Media Matters exposed:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDRkMDhlNGRiZTg4MDkwZjY1NmYxMjkxOGFjYjkyNjE=
I'm sorry as I previously have stated I have yet to recieve my Lush Limprod secret decoder ring, and my years supply of Litium/oxicotin laced Koolaide, so I am sure that we have misintrepreted your intentions when you posted
My fellow Marines and I would like to have a serious dicussion with you and your band of sissies who are lying about Limbaugh. Let's set up a time so we can settle this matter once and for all.
You must forgive my moronic assumption that it it was somehow a veiled threat. Exactly how would a face to face meeting settle anything?
The Corp must have really changed over the years, because there was a time that no Marine would want to be caught hanging out with a bunch of "sissies" to discuss anything.
Again Kevin the name calling is not conducive to a meaningful dialogue, Why some would get the impression that you are a insecure, immature, phony, who puffs up his own machismo , but in truth is just a overweight, repressed individual sitting in hash mark stained boxers, trying to pretend to be the type of guy you fantize about when you sit in the dark with the web browser chicking out profiles on Hotmilitarystuds.com
For the record Kevin, I served, I proud of my service, but I don't feel it;s necassary to go around shouting it from the rafters to make my point, nor does someones service or lack of service make them less of a patriot or less entitled to an opinion.
"For the record Kevin, I served, I proud of my service, but I don't feel it;s necassary to go around shouting it from the rafters to make my point, nor does someones service or lack of service make them less of a patriot or less entitled to an opinion."
Those of us who have both served in the military and have listened to Limbaugh for numerous years have a better idea of what Limbaugh thinks of the military than a bunch of political hacks with MMFA. Limbaugh has defended the military from smears hurled by Pinky Reid, John Murtha, John Kerry, Dick Durbin, et. al. MMFA has not. MMFA has created a phony debate here.
And you moonbats should be ashamed of yourselves for buying the lies offered by David Brock. Brock is a proven liar and a discredited journalist. You guys correctly considered Brock a liar during the 1990s and you would consider him a liar tomorrow if he were to declare that he is now a ex-liberal. Why not consider him a liar today?
Thanks for answering the question Kevin. Oh wait you didn't you diverted the subject again, well no matter.
Well let's examine my choice is to believe a flag waving Drug addicted, Viagra popping, child prostitute capital visiting, overweight, never served, draft dodging, chickenhawk waterboy for the GOP or to read what the self same wind bag said and draw my own conclusions.
I choose to think for myself, and it has nothing to do with Brock or anyone else.
Unlike some people I don't have to be told what to think.
The left gave it their best shot. But it looks like it's just not working, and people just don't care.
All the RageWho's stirring up the candidates more: MoveOn or Limbaugh?By Christopher Beam, John Dickerson, Brad Flora, and Chadwick MatlinUpdated Friday, Oct. 5, 2007, at 3:58 PM ET
All the Rage: Republicans and Democrats are in an umbrage war and the GOP is winning. When MoveOn.org questioned Gen. David Petraeus in an ad in the New York Times, Republican presidential candidates raced to show their outrage. Now some Democrats are trying to offer a similar response to Rush Limbaugh, who used the phrase "phony soldiers" during a call-in conversation about American soldiers who oppose the war. Rep. Mark Udall authored legislation condemning the remarks, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid sent a letter to Limbaugh's boss asking him to disavow them. (He didn't.) Limbaugh, for his part, fought back on his radio show—insisting that Democrats were trying to "smear" him and purposely taking his comments out of context. How did the 2008 Democratic presidential candidates respond? Only John Edwards showed the intensity that GOP candidates did over the MoveOn controversy. Here's a breakdown of how upset everyone is:
go to liberal slate.com for the rest of this story!
I've tried to post comments in defense of Rush, but they never get posted. I guess I'm being censored. I hope you liberals have fun talking to yourselves in regards to the lies you spout about Rush. Maybe this post will get through, but I dought it. If you would like to have a conversation about this, come on over to a conservative site where they don't view the posts first, then decide if it should be posted or not.
Perfect example of Con logic.
If it's liberal media you can't believe anything it says, unless it agrees with them and then they can't wait to embrace it. I would think that as a good con you should be afraid because if it was in a "liberal" site it must be a lie.
I remember before the 06 election how the message was how the left was going to lose, yet in the end the people not the messengers decided.
Spin it however you like BillyBob, it's just one more little thing to add to the pile of Conservative hypocrisy.
Not everyone has to buy every issue, it's a compilation of the entirety that brought the self proclaimed "Permanent Republican Majority" crashing down, and there is nothing the cons can do about it, except come to sites like this and cry foul.
That's why we have so many cons posting, it's their frustration that people are beginning to see through the hypocrisy of the message, and starting to actually ask questions.
I view it as a good sign that so many cons pay so much attention to MMFA, because if it wasn't having an impact, none of you would be here.
What the cons are now experiencing is called "The Death of a Thousand Cuts."
hubble:
I've asked this question before, but I'm sincerely interested in your answer:
Which was a bigger disappointment to you --
A. The "Fitz-mas" fizzle over the non-story about Plame -
B. the non-interest in the media over the non-controversy about the "phony soldiers"
I've got to know!!
I know that most of you who are twisting the truth about Rush's comments of "phoney soldiers" have never listened to his show. If you did, you wouldn't be making such comments. I can understand your hatred for him because I felt the same hatred for Bill Clinton. He was President for eight years and I never heard the man speak. I couldn't stand looking at him so there was no way I could listen to him. Now years later, I hear some of the things he said while he was in office and I know today that I was right to feel the way I did back then. So I challenge all of you to not make the same mistake I did. Don't wait for years to go by before you know you were right all along. Tune into Rush and listen for a few days.
Bubbles,
I think that you are correct in one respect and it is regarding the attention that this site is now receiving. But I also believe it will acheive a different goal than what you hope.
We conservatives are not crying foul but making certain that the left and the democrat party remains true to stated ideals. In the past, democrat candidates have espoused a dogma to appeal to the left in their party but would object when labeled 'liberal', like it was a disease. This was done in order to have a chance with winning an election.
On the other hand, when conservatives make their case clear to the public, they win elections. When they stay true to those values, they have been and will be supported by the voting public. When they don't, they lose like in 06. I think conservatism, its ideals based on individual rights, limited government control over our lives and the defense of our country will always win elections because it is what mainstream America believes.
That is why we on the right are defending ourselves but also appreciating the fact that now those ideals of the left are also being seen and evaluated by the public. This limits the chances for a candidate to smokescreen and deny their left leanings as the election draws closer.
So, keep up the good work media matters (vl), let your light so shine!
proud conservative if the right really stood for limited government and individual rights they would not support the patriot act nor the dimunition of individual rights. this is a tip in case the rhetoric is confusing you: the people who advocate suspending the bill of rights do not support individual rights they oppose them. the republicans are the ones who want more and more power centralized in the hands of a strong man and who are openly hostile to any rights for individuals unless the rights are primarily for businesses. the right is only in favor of less taxes and generally favor more powerful government. you seem to only listen to the rhetoric and not the actual details. Allowing the president star chamber rights and the right to "torture" is not NOT the indicia of a faction that truly limits the power of government. that you would offer such an argument is one reason why I do not consider what the right says any longer. You're either stupid or dishonest.
Oh Henry,
You make a good point about the Patriot Act. I share your concerns. But I know that during the Civil War, Lincoln suspended some liberties and FDR did the same during WWII. I underestand that intellegence works in the nether world, however I like the fact that the act required re-authorization. There has not been a spate of goon squads roaming the libraries or kicking down the doors of citizens'. But still, we need to gather information on foreignors who mean us harm. The issue with the internet is that what comes through the US needs be accessed. I think publically the CIA recently testified before congress that about 100 people in our country are being monitored. I'll be honest, I'm more comfortable with the people in control of that now than in the past. Who knows how many FBI files would end up in the White House or in the pants of Sandy Berger? I know that congress will be making some updated version this month, let's hope it does a better job of convincing the public that they are protected from harm and from violation of civil liberties. It also should require ongoing oversight and re-authorization.
As for who would be in power, I believe in the message of conservatism and conservatives is that smaller government is better. It does not place power in the hands of a few but in the individual. Rather than make for the class struggle a basis for removing individual excellence, conservatives see that each person has the opportunity to suceed or fail on their own mertis. What lowering tax rates does is increase overall revenue to the government but unleashes the power of the individual to control more of their own money. Just look at how the economy continues to motor despite high oil prices, housing and mortgage problems; we essentially have full employment, increasing wages and small business starts(more indivduals in control of their lives) and low inflation and interest rates. I feel if democrats had their way with higher taxes and spending, it would be extremely detrimental to the economy.
So for me it is about the individual. What is on the horizon that frightens me about civil liberties is the government becoming the censoring agent for information dissemination. Why just stop with Rush and Sean, should we limit any news or political discussion on radio or TV? What if a republican, rather than Waxman wanted to gather information on newspeople? I hope you would support complete freedom of expression, as well.
What is far more disturbing is the division and venom we are spitting at each other over politics. 100+ posts of vicious and sarcastic nastiness that plays out better than either party could hope for.
i'm sorry, i know how much the left hates Limbaugh. Unfortunately, this issue is a lie and a fabrication beyond all correction. there is no way that from a Monday to a Wednesday's that even H.G. Wells could have changed the timeline of one person's comments. I know that the truth is a pain for anyone with a goal or ajenda, but truth is not fluid.
Unless you are deliberately ignoring reality in exchange for a fabricated self-important world...
For whatever quirk of fate had me on the other end of the radio, I heard the entire week of Limbaugh programming. How many of you defending the lie can say the same? Have any of you who despise Limbaugh spent the time listening rather than pulling from eleventy websites with snippits?
At least when I hear anyone on the right talk smack about Air America, I can refute it from actually listening.
look at us! This arguing is what the parties want us doing. Rather than asking if Guliani or Clinton have any experience, we argue about flag pins and 'phony soldiers.'
You want power and victory so bad that you are puppets. I wish Hannity would get lost at sea as much as anyone, but I wont support my party attacking him and his rights from the Seante floor...
For crying out loud people. the president of Vote Vets was on Rusty Humphries saying the real issue was that Rush had too much influence.
and that is the real issue. the party of the left is doing a great disservice to those who are members of the left... do you think Harry frggn Reid and Pelosi are a fair reflection of liberals around the US? Just WHY do you think that they would be wasting time on the Senate attacking a private citizen? Do you think these wind-up monkys do anything without something to gain?
I sure don't want BUSH or the Neo-Cons represent ME to the country. they are not a fair picture of me either...nor millions of conservatives... they crapped all over their opportunity.
but yet, we post here beating eachother up so that some hack/lying politician can have more time in office...more time lying to us about what they will do for us... let's look back over 50 years and see how well that's gone so far.
Proudconservative,
In your original post, you said that you hope Media Matters will continue to keep this Limbaugh story alive because it will reveal the Left for what it really is and therefore cause voters to prefer the Right. You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that's an accurate synopsis.
If that's the case: what exactly does Media Matters expose the Left as?
Before you answer that inquiry with what will probably be an attack on my fundamental character, don't presume I'm a Democrat. I could just be a "proudindependent" and you could be alienating me.
Now, since I'm impatient (and more importantly, have a point to make), I'll answer that question for you:
A. Limbaugh's original comments were targeted at former military personnel who now question the war in Iraq. B. This shows that Limbaugh's goal is to silence dissent by attacking the integrity of a few individuals, and then using that to generalize an entire group of likeminded people (the Left). C. Media Matters points this out, which makes them pro-dissent, in opposition to Limbaugh's anti-dissent position.
I guess Media Matters, by continuing to discuss this story, is framing the Left as the party of dissent, but of scrutiny and free speech. This would therefore expose the Right as the party of silencing voices in order to maintain the perception of a united front that blindly supports the Administration.
So while I know you would love more than anything for Media Matters to make the entire Left look like Communists, in reality it's much more narrow and much more mainstream than you'd like to believe.
Your turn for a rebuttal. Oh, and I want to read some warrants, buddy. I'm not here to read worthless attacks on my character; I can just go to Fox News for that shenanigans.
The Media Matters take on this comment by Limbaugh is just plain wrong. It's obvious the man (Limbaugh) meant to refer to individuals like Jesse MacBeth who falsify their military record to build their credibility. I think to claim otherwise is completely disingenuous. It's just not plausible to assert that a reasonable person would understand Limbaugh's comments to refer to individuals who actually served in Iraq and also oppose the war. To put an even finer point on it, Limbaugh states exactly that seconds later. The plurality argument is even more specious - when it comes to individuals that pop up in the news, everyone, especially talk radio jocks, is entitled to the reasonable assumption that where there is one, there are others. It's a generic assumption. Move On, Media Matters.
After reading the above posts, I have come to this conclusion....Kevin1007 has nothing to do until the next Harry Poter book arrives on the bookshelves. He actually thinks this is a video game where you get weapons for calling people names and following the leaders.
I still believe that he is but a teenager waiting for the right girl or guy to come along. I do not say this with any malice. He just seems to be mired in those terrible teens.
This is long but important. This shows what CRAP this story is. I just read a piece on here claiming that Limbaugh edited audio and transcripts. Aperently Media Matters is either not smart enough to find transcripts on his sight or is intentionally leading us astray. They posted this as if he was hiding something:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200709280009?f=h_top
I decided to do my own research and this is what I found or Rush's sight:
RUSH: It's not possible intellectually to follow these people.CALLER: No, it's not. And what's really funny is they never talk to real soldiers. They pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and spout to the media.RUSH: The phony soldiers.CALLER: Phony soldiers. If you talk to any real soldier and they're proud to serve, they want to be over in Iraq, they understand their sacrifice and they're willing to sacrifice for the country.RUSH: They joined to be in Iraq.CALLER: A lot of people.RUSH: You know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you sign up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan, or somewhere.CALLER: Exactly, sir. My other comment, my original comment, was a retort to Jill about the fact we didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. Actually, we have found weapons of mass destruction in chemical agents that terrorists have been using against us for a while now. I've done two tours in Iraq, I just got back in June, and there are many instances of insurgents not knowing what they're using in their IEDs. They're using mustard artillery rounds, VX artillery rounds in their IEDs. Because they didn't know what they were using, they didn't do it right, and so it didn't really hurt anybody. But those munitions are over there. It's a huge desert. If they bury it somewhere, we're never going to find it.RUSH: Well, that's a moot point for me right now.CALLER: Right.RUSH: The weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We're there. We all know they were there, and Mahmoud even admitted it in one of his speeches here talking about Saddam using the poison mustard gas or whatever it is on his own people. But that's moot. What's more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working, and all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and your colleagues over there is a great threat to them. It's frustrating and maddening, and why they must be kept in the minority. I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much.
Wow, the full transcript is there. Looks like Media Matters decided to mislead us.
I just found out that Media Matters is going to review my posts before they go up so lets see if any of this actually gets posted. If it does then they will at least have a little credibility. Here is another nugget to chew on though. After reading some things on this sight I would have been lead to believe that Rush had never mentioned Jesse MacBeth before the 1 minute and 50 seconds (or whatever it is that I have seen here over and over again) after the comment was made on the 26th. I found this however on Rush's websight (note the date which is the air date. the transcript was posted the day before):
Inconvenient Truth!September 25, 2007The anti-war left has its celebrities, and one of them was "Army Ranger" Jesse MacBeth. Now, what made the 23-year-old "corporal" a hero to the anti-war crowd was not his Purple Heart or his being afflicted with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq.No -- what made "Army Ranger" Jesse MacBeth a hero to the left was his "courage," in their view, off the battlefield. Without regard to consequences, he told the world the abuses he said he had witnessed in Iraq. American soldiers killing unarmed civilians -- hundreds of men, women, and even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, MacBeth describes the horrors this way: "We would burn their bodies... hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque."Recently Jesse MacBeth, the poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. He was sentenced to five months in jail [and] three years' probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim; his Army discharge record, too. Yes, Jesse McBeth was in the Army. Briefly. 44 days. Before he was washed out of boot camp. MacBeth is not an Army Ranger; he is not a corporal; he never won the Purple Heart; he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen.But don't look for retractions, folks -- not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread his lies about our troops. Fiction serves their purposes; the truth, to borrow a phrase, is inconvenient to them.Read the Background Material on the Morning Update...(Seattle Post-Intelligencer: Fake Veteran Gets 5-month Sentence