Fox News falsehood: Limbaugh "used this term 'phony soldiers' when he was talking about a guy named Jesse MacBeth"
SUMMARY: Purporting to "give you some background on this quickly," Fox News' Megyn Kelly
said of Rush Limbaugh's comments characterizing service members who advocate
U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers": "Rush originally used this term
'phony soldiers' when he was talking about a guy named Jesse MacBeth." In fact,
when Limbaugh first used the term on the September 26 show, he had not mentioned
MacBeth, and did not mention MacBeth until 1 minute and 50 seconds after he used
the phrase "phony soldiers."
On the October 2 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom, discussing Rush Limbaugh's recent comments characterizing service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as "phony soldiers," co-anchor Megyn Kelly -- purporting to "give you some background on this quickly" -- 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 on the September 26 show, he did not mention MacBeth until 1 minute and 50 seconds after he used the phrase "phony soldiers."
As Media Matters for America has documented, during the September 28 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio show, Limbaugh claimed that he had not been talking "about the anti-war movement generally," but rather "about one soldier ... Jesse MacBeth." Limbaugh further asserted that "Media Matters had the transcript, but they selectively choose what they want to make their point." To support this claim, Limbaugh purported to air the "entire" segment in question from the September 26 broadcast of his show. In fact, the clip he then aired had been spliced: Excised from the clip was 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.
Kelly's assertion that "Rush originally used this term, 'phony soldiers' when he was talking about a guy named Jesse MacBeth" echoed Limbaugh's assertion on his September 28 broadcast that he was "talking about one soldier with that 'phony soldier' comment, Jesse MacBeth." But as the transcript makes clear, and Media Matters has noted, 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].
Further, as Media Matters documented, on his September 28 broadcast, Limbaugh expanded the group of "phony soldiers" to include Vietnam veteran Rep. John P. Murtha (D-PA) and Pvt. Scott Thomas Beauchamp, who is currently serving in Iraq. In asserting that he was originally "talking about a genuine phony soldier," Limbaugh went on to state: "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.
From the October 2 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom:
KELLY: Well, new developments now with the hottest story this hour, the left attacking Rush Limbaugh for his comments on anti-war soldiers. We went back to his Wednesday radio show and pulled this. Take a listen:
[begin audio clip]
CALLER 2: 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: The phony soldiers.
[end audio clip]
KELLY: All right, so that was a caller, obviously, calling in. And now Democrats, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV], are demanding an apology from Limbaugh. Rush says if anyone needs to apologize to our military, it is Harry Reid. Now, let me just give you some background on this quickly. Rush originally used this term, "phony soldiers," when he was talking about a guy named Jesse MacBeth. Jesse MacBeth never served in Iraq, says Rush. He claimed to have a Purple Heart; he didn't. This guy was propped up by the left, because he opposes the Iraq war, as some sort of hero, as a talking-points guy, this Jesse MacBeth was, and Rush 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 now, it has turned into this huge controversy, because Media Matters -- you remember this group, they attack O'Reilly all the time -- now they say Rush is referring to all soldiers who criticize the Iraq war as "phony soldiers." It's led to the United States Senate getting involved, and Kelly Wright's got more on that from Washington.
the caller says the media "never talk to real soldiers". rush agrees that they are "phony soldiers". pretty clear.
ABC News reported the phony soldiers two days before Rush spoke about it. Stop this nonsense.
Keep trollin', trollin', trollin',
never really knowin',
if what you're repeatin', been said!
Don't try to get yer facts straight,
once you post it's too late,
your lies and those deflections, will decide.
spread those rumors thick,
Let's see what will stick,
obtuse observations will abide.
Spin it up, spread it thick,
Keep repeatin', make it stick,
Lay it on, Obfuscate Dittohead!
Set it up, claim it's fact, Who will check?
Grey is black, Get yer facts - from faux news, Dittohead!
Good dawg, Snoop. Goood dawg!
Most excellent! Roll 'em out, ride 'em in...
odious content can't grasp the basic fact that there can actually be different subjects being talked about here. no one denied that there have been men who claimed they were what they actually were not. the fact is that the caller was saying that every soldier the media offered was not a real soldier. rush agreed by saying they were "phony soldiers". that's not "nonsense", but the actual words spoken by rush.
The story about fake vets on ABC has nothing to do with Rush's slur against our troops. ABC was talking about soldiers who were phony, not calling troops who oppose the war phony.
Funny how MM misses that sentence...
Anyone who listens to or knows Rush Limbaugh knows this story is BS because of two things:
1. Rush does support the troops regardless of their personal view on the war or anything else for that matter and has said so on his show numerous times over the years. Unlike a lot of you liberals, he has nothing but the utmost respect for those serving our country and protecting our freedom and says so on almost a daily basis. You should try listening to him yourself instead of relying on your mis-leading, out-of-context, liberal, Media Monkeys for your information. To believe this story you would have to disregard everything else he has ever said about the troops.
2. Rush is way too smart to say anything like he is being accused of saying. Rush speaks on the radio three hours a day five days a week for years and you have to take one phone call, spin it out of context to try and prove that Rush doesn’t support the troops? Ridiculous!
Don’t misunderestimate Rush. He’s been running circles around you liberals for years and that is why you have to try and shut him down. He’s effective and that drives you all crazy!
rush supports the soldiers who agree with him and the bush administration. he only gives lip service to the right of other soldiers to disagree.
Yup, full spin cycle now engaged. And they also had the nerve to call us a criminal enterprise. I see fox has declared all out war on MM. funny that they hate that this site does just what sites on the right do with the exception that they don't distort the audio to prove a point!
"But now, it has turned into this huge controversy, because Media Matters -- you remember this group, they attack O'Reilly all the time -- "
I love this quote. Yes, folks, this is News - MM "attack(s) O'Reilly all the time" by simply replaying the very things O'Reilly says - in context. Fox truthiness at its best.
Your use of the word "truthiness" reminds of another O'Reilly/Colbert moment when Billo was comparing DailyKos to the KKK and the Nazi Party and Colbert said, to the best of my recollection - yes because as we know if there was one thing the Nazi Party stood for it was the free exchange of sometimes unpopular ideas in an open forum.
Truthiness indeed!
It amazes me that Fox can never tell the truth. I watched the video in the report and Steve Doozy says that MMFA says their mission is to "monitor misinformation" and asks why they are not monitoring liberal talk show hosts. MMFA actually says they are monitoring "conservative" misinformation. And people wonder why the Dems will not have a debate on Faux News.
I caught that too, H-man. Steve Douchey can't even get the most basic thing correct. Or it's more likely that he knows what he said was incorrect but doesn't care because he doesn't want the viewers to know the truth.
MMFA is "dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting CONSERVATIVE misinformation in the U.S. media". That is very different that what Doucey said and makes his point totally moot.
Douchey lied and mislead the viewers on national TV. Mrs. Happy must be sooo proud of her lying hubby. Blech!!
I'm wondering how the right-wing spin machine rushing to Limbaugh's defense are going to spin this one....
Melanie Morgan not only repeats Rush's attack, she takes it a step further:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/10/02/morgan-soltz-rush/
I posted the same link in the previous thread, I'm waiting to see what RINO, or the name jacker Bush lies, or copius says now...
Melanie is missing out on publicity so she joins the fray. This airhead thinks that MM means Melanie Morgana. She is having a hissy fit not being the one in the limelight.
First off all, how much was the Jessy MacBeth propped up by the left wing media? I read a lot and had never even heard of him once.
Second of all - everyone seems to miss the fact that he said soldiers - implying more than one. Name some more for us Rush.
To be clear, I am not implying at all the the MacBeth story is not true or was fabricated otr anything like that. But the way Fox, Rush, and the rest report it you would think the antiwar crowd all have Jesse MacBeth shrines in their homes or something.
bwierenga, I've been asking that question for days now. Apparently, Rush has his sucklings convinced that MacBeth is some sort of a hero to "the left", when you, and I, and several other America-hating war on Xmas waging commies at this site, had never heard of him.
But I guess that's the way it works, Just as Rush telling his audience he didn't say what's on the tape is good enough for them, they buy the St. MacBeth story, too.
If I'm wrong, could any of the visiting Rushbots provide some examples of the "lionizing" of Jesse MacBeth?
Here's the wiki-link on MacBeth. His most prominent exposure was in an indie anti-war video by a group called PepperSpray Productions, who pulled the film once his true record came to light. He was also interviewed by the website socialistalternative.org (who are just as likely to attack Dems than Republicans) and got a mention in the Eastern Arizona Courier.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Macbeth
Kelly's implying that "the left" generically "propped him up" [sic] as "some kind of hero" is stretching a point to say the very least.
Thanks for the link.
This proves my point I think tha Jesse MacBeth was not really a mainsteam voice of the left and also explains why I have never heard of him as I do not frequent the socialistalternative website, nor that bastion of mainstream liberalism known as the, what was it, the eastern Arizona Courier"?
Take on one we've heard of Rush. I believe Jon Soltz gave you the offer to have him on your show!
Christopher, thanks for taking the time, but what I really want is some sort of backup from those who insisted, as Rush did, that MacBeth was propped up as some sort of hero.
If it sounds like I'm nitpicking, or hung up on this detail, this is my point; Even if we were to pretend that Rush's defenders were right, and he didn't say what we heard him say, and didn't edit his tape and transcript, what was the root issue here?
The issue that this whole mess grew out of was this; Limbaugh's contention that the media was only talking to military who were anti-war (phony or otherwise) and there were a number of these "phony" or "anti-war" soldiers that were being very prominently featured in the mainstream media.
Several posters here asserted that MacBeth was treated this way (I've been using "lionized", because that was the exact word one of the Rushbots used).
That's why I've been asking all of them for examples.I have had no responses supporting Rush's position, only evidence from the non-EIB-afflicted proving that the whole thing is BS.
Which ties in to the very essence of Rush's lies. Who are these "phony soldiers"(plural) you're talking about?
Libs didn't promote Macbeth, HOWEVER:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200606050007
Limbaugh promoted a phony pro-war vet. Even after the Pentagon forced Rush to state over the air that the name the caller Rush promoted didn't come up for anybody in Iraq, and the air wing this fake vet said he belonged to didn't exist.
Unlike the lib group that dropped their fake vet the moment they found out he was phony, Limbaugh continued to defend his fake vet.
Could be because 'conservatives' can lie through their teeth and not get called on it, whereas 'liberals' get blasted in the Senate for having a poorly worded, though nevertheless accurate, title in an ad campaign.
Frankly, this particular 'phony soldier' piece is becoming a bit tiresome...
But, the fact that Morgan or Limbaugh or any of these ridiculous mouthpieces have the audacity to call anyone 'phony' is... absurd.
Interesting how the spotlight is slowly turning from Limbaugh and O'Riley on to the intellectual dishonesty of MMFA.
You wish...
Just can't stand that it's impossible to accuse somebody who posts the exact audio of what a person says of intellectual dishonesty.
That's really not true. You can post an entire transcript and then falsely attribute meaning or motive to the words posted.
In this case, I think that MMFA is on some pretty thin ice stakeing so much on a 1 minute and 50 second delay in clarifying the phony soldiers comment even though he clarified it within the same conversation. But I know I'm in the minority on that, at least around here.
If 1 minute + is thin ice, why did Mr. Edit eliminate this part of his conversation.
Seems he changed it for a reason..which is??
I wonder if he cut that part out because it contained his oft-repeated inference that the troops shouldn't complain about Iraq, since they volunteered. I guess that sentiment doesn't play too well on Armed Forces Radio.
I'll put on my "reasonable" hat, and give Rush the benefit of the doubt here. However, being the professional communicator that he is, shouldn't he have said "phony soldiers like Jesse Macbeth?" Seems to me that he realized his gaff later in the conversation and inserted the anecdote about Macbeth to cover his ass. Instead of admitting this, he edits the tape to "prove" that his version is correct. He then expands his list of "phony soldiers" to include Jack Murtha. All this, plus his propensity to lie, makes his version a little hard to swallow.
Oh, Bruce, say it isn't so. Please.
Rush's clarification "within the same conversation" means absolutely nothing. He did not clarify his agreement with the caller's insult of the troops. He let the caller talk instead.
Rush edited the tape in order to make it look like his comments about McBeth were a direct, immediate clarification, when the whole thing shows that not to be the case. If it doesn't make a difference, why did Rush do that, and lie about it?
The bottom line is that if he really disagreed with the caller's smear of the troops, then he should have retracted his agreement. He never did.
I read your exchange with MUTUALDISDAIN on the other thread and thought you both made good points. But his explanations seemed at least plausable, and that's why even though the preponderence of evidence may support your argument, I don't feel it meets the reasonable doubt standard that MMFA would need to fully win this argument in my view.
Rush has claimed today that he has discussed other phony soldiers on his program over the past few months. It would be worth checking in to, because if he has then that is further evidence that the contextual question is up for grabs.
Rush is rippable for not challenging some of the callers points, but I do agree with MUTUALDISDAIN that not challenging something is different from endorsing it. I realize you don't agree but I'm just calling it the way I see it. I might be wrong. Hammer away.
Actually, that was quite a reasonable statement you made. I disagree of course, because the premise of the argument is assumption as in he assumes his audience knows what he means. Not a strong argument to make. But nonetheless, nice summary, bruce.
The most reasoned statement on this issue I have seen supporting Limbuagh on this. I disagree with it but you make a decent point.
I think you missed what I said. The issue is not that Rush just didn't disagree, it's that he actively agreed. I can't believe that you're saying it's plausible that Rush could be disagreeing with the caller when the record shows that not to be the case. There has been no explanation of how Rush's response could possibly be construed as disagreement, not by MD, not by anyone. So I have absolutely no idea where you are drawing reasonable doubt from in that conversation.
Again, if Rush was thinking about McBeth when he originally made the comment, fine. But the caller took Rush's line and made his own argument from it, so it really doesn't make any difference how many times Rush brought up that story. And a man who's spent twenty years in radio should be able to handle an inflammatory conservative caller without having to doctor transcripts and lie about it. If he misunderstood what the caller was saying, he could just say so, instead of lying about the context of the comments. If he did understand it, then he should have ripped the caller up.
I mean, we're talking about our troops here, right? Patriotism, respecting our military, etc? It's not like you blow that sort of thing off, like someone insulted your favorite baseball team or something.
Clear Channel responded to Harry Reids letter:
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM43_071002_reidletter.html
That's not surprising, but I don't see the relevance to my post.
BTW, I do appreciate that you see the preponderance of evidence on my side, and agree Limbaugh is "rippable" for his lack of criticism of his caller. But there's more to it than that, as I've said. And I would like to know what plausible explanation you saw from MD, because I sure don't see it.
The only thing I'm even attempting to defend Rush on is that his "phony soldiers" remark is explained by him 1 minute 50 seconds later which MMFA and many others reject.
Although the rejection of that explanation may in fact be the real truth, I still see a plausibility that Rush's explanation could be true. I believe that the other poster tried to reason this out as being a subjective argument by MMFA, and therefore unproveable, which I found to be compelling.
I've said myself that Rush may have meant McBeth originally. But it's irrelevant, because that's not what the caller meant, the caller made a blanket statement about the troops.
That's the problem. Rush could have just told the caller at the time that he was misrepresenting what Rush said, instead of agreeing with the caller. And this is something that should be fairly simple to explain, without any dishonest edits or attacking people for taking him out of context, etc.
It's not that I'm dismissing McBeth because it's not plausible that Rush was talking about him originally, I'm dismissing him because it's not relevant even if he was originally talking about him.
And besides, as has been pointed out, if people like McBeth were really what Rush was talking about, then his citation of Murtha as a "phony soldier" doesn't make any sense. If he can expand his meaning to include a decorated Marine, then he could expand his meaning to include all the soldiers the caller smeared.
Subjectivity is a ludicrous defense here. Of course it's subjective. I don't remember that being a factor when Kerry made his botched joke, do you? He didn't explicitly say "troops are stupid", yet that was the subjective conclusion people were reaching. Did anyone say "hey we can't say anything about what Kerry said because it's a subjective conclusion"?
Obviously you're going to have a lot of situations where people don't explicitly say something but clearly imply something, where there's only one sensible interpretation to be made. If "subjectivity" is a negating factor to talk about those sorts of statements, then anyone can get away with saying anything as long as they don't say it directly. "Bush would have prevented 9/11 the week before the attacks, but he was too busy selling all his airline stock". Now, did I say Bush knew about the attacks ahead of time? Did I say it explicitly, or do you have to interpret it?
How would you prove your argument against me? By convincing people of what I meant? But that's subjective, so it's not provable.
I actually think Kerry was smeared unfairly, and I assume you do as well. So political opponents will take these opportunities to subjectibely interpret statements in the most negative way. It makes it a he said/he said situation that doesn't really go anywhere except get MMFA a lot of publicity, which is one of their hopes. They got it.
Of course Kerry was smeared, because there was a plausible alternate explanation. But there don't seem to be any of those that make much sense in this case.
What I'm saying is that you have to discuss subjective comments sometimes. If some radio host made the "Bush selling airline stock" comment I presented, you can either interpret it, or you have to ignore it. Obviously you can't ignore that sort of thing, or people can just say anything about anyone at any time, no matter how wildly irresponsible. There has to be some accountability.
This is also a case where you have to interpret it, and the best you can do is to do so fairly and honestly (unlike right-wing fanatics over the Kerry incident). Rush's subsequent Murtha comment, his dismissal of the previous caller as a phony Republican and his labeling of Hagel as some sort of traitor only show that the interpretation we've taken is consistent with his pattern of questioning the character and legitimacy of anyone who disagrees with him on his precious war.
If that were all they were hanging their hat on I would agree. It isnt. Rush agreed when the caller said that the REAL soldiers wanted to be in Iraq, well we have been over it a couple of hundred times. I dont see any thin ice here. Rush didnt say phony soldiers like Macbeth. I think its pretty straight forward
Snoopy, I think by "spotlight", W(ingnut) C(ool aid) 4me means the little shiny coin on a string that is being dangled in front of him.
Except unlike O'Reilly and Rush, this "dishonesty" applies to Rush and O'Reilly, who have been caught over and over and over, simply LYING.
Latest being the way O'Reilly lies about his statement regarding the black restaurant, and Rush lying about his "phony soldiers" comment.
But in conservafairyland, anyone putting a conservative's actual comments in context and accurate, is "smearing them."
Now, that's FUNNY! A dittobot accusing MMFA of intellectual dishonesty! Haw! MMFA could post obvious, transparent fairy tales for the next five years and still not catch up to the ubiquitous fabrications of Rush Limbaugh.
He is of the Limborg. He has been assimilated.
it isnt. There ISNT any intellectual dishonesty except from you wingnuts. Just because you and FOX wishes they could make it turn toward MMFAs non existant intellectual dishonesty wont make it so. You guys got nothin, we can actually read.
I thought I should also say this - I was listening to Rush on my way in to work today (I work a later shift) and he played a soundbite from, I think Harry Ried, stating that is a Democratic or Left Wing radio host said any such thing ther would be huge outrage on the right. He said that this was a stupid statement because left wing radio hosts are saying this sort of thing all the time but no one is listening to them so it gets no airplay.
He then went on . . . to commercial. No examples, no soundbites of any kind, no naming of any names. I listen to Stephanie Miller every morning and I never hear anything like that from her - nor from Franken when he still had his show, or Ed Schultz (sp?). But Rush said it so it must be true.
I will take a cue from him and Fox News then . . . Some people are saying Rush is back on the Oxyconton.
Who said? Well some people. I use the same sources as Hannity does - some people - sometimes just 'many" as in "many are saying".
I think everyone here is missing the point. If a soldier is against the war than he IS in fact a phony soildier... otherwise what in the world is the point of his existance over there?Not to menton, everyone on this site (well at least 95% of you) would rather see an American solider dead with a bullet in the "back" of his head than to actually see him fight to defent America... that's pretty clear from what I'm reading around this site. You guys HATE (strong word I know) the military so what gives your the right to bash Limbo?
Submitwolf, you may want to check your basement command station room for gas leaks and loose lead paint.
You're an idiot (strong word, I know).
I appreciate your frankness, Nerzog. ;0)
Sorry...I know I shouldn't post such responses, but I let my emotions get the best of me. Maybe Wolfboy will come back and engage us in some enlightening debate.
Aw, Nerz, your comment wasn't for me?. I thought I'd been promoted from deranged troll to idiot.
Yeah, I should have clarified who I was talking to. I forget sometimes that a response may not always appear right after the initial post.
Submit,
I have to ask you...... have you infact, ever worn the uniform of or as a real soldier, let alone been to war in Iraq, Vietnam, or in WWII?
If not, you have proven the point of many of us in here, that those of you that beat the drums of war and self-indulge in your own fantasy about being a tough guy arm-chair warrior are pathetic at best and truely Un-American at worst!
If so, I am at a loss for words, as I can't seem to grasp the illogic you and those like you use to put down those that have/are serving. Unless you yourself have been there then you should remain silent in theory but since this is America......
You have every right to make a complete ass of yourself and hope that you continue posting here at MMFA so that false patriots like you can be readily shown to be as useful to our democracy as a heart attack is to good health!
I know I should not respond to a troll - but I will not take this crap lying down. I honor and respect the military - including those in my family that have served. If you note most of the comments on this site are directed at the administration and the war - not the soldiers who are fighting said war. The soldiers do their job without question - that is what they do. However, many of them have come out and said they do not think we should have gone to Iraq, that we should not be there still, or that they don't even know what they are doing there.
Are you saying soldiers do not have the same free speech rights they fight to defend? Are you saying that to support the troops we must support the quagmire that is the occupation of Iraq? If you are saying that you are dead wrong.
There is no one here that wants to see dead members of the military - not a one of us. It seems you would rather seem them die needlessly in Iraq than at home with their families, or re-deployed to another part of the world that actually makes sense.
Don't make those accusations here. You can go over to littlegreenfootballs if that is the rhetoric you like to spew troll.
Thanks
SUBMITWOLF, that is the dumbest post that I have ever seen on this website... I am a veteran of Nam...a grunt with an Air Medal, a Bronze Star and a CIB...look it up, I am sure those initials mean nothing to you. I hated the war and didn't think I should be shot in the back of the head. Your ignorance is only surpassed by your stupid statement which, we understand is just to upset people here. But, it doesn't work and you are still an idiot.
Submitwolf,
You have no idea what you are talking about. How dare you say that military people who are against the war are not real soldiers. You can be against the war and still fight because that is your job.
Also, HOW DARE YOU SAY THAT WE HATE THE MILITARY. Listen Scum Bag!!! You don't deserve the protection you receive from the brave men and woman of the United States Armed Forces. Be happy that this is a forum where you are not in front of the people you are talking too. Because if you told me that I don't care about my friends who have been and are currently in Iraq and Afghanistan I would show you how much I do believe in them. And just so you know. They don't like the fact they are fighting over there but they do their job because that is what a soldier does.
I apologize to the rest of the civilized people who had to read my rant but this type of garbage (yes I mean you wolf) has to be addressed.
Wow, are you really that ignorant? Just because in your bloodlust and zeal to see as many Americans die as you can doesnt mean the moronic nonsense you just spewed makes any sense at all. I get that you HATE American soldiers and love to see them killed but even by that standard of stupidity your post was incredibly detached from reality. I can bash the Oxymoron anytime I want. He is a liar and a fool. Anyone who takes him seriously has a significant mental deficiency. We get you are a complete idiot and are motivated by you love of seeing Americans DIE but soldiers sign up to protect us. To protect what is crucial for our country, that is a noble thing, that doesnt mean when President Gump decides to use them in ways that have nothing to DO with what is crucial to our country that good men who would volunteer in a minute to fight a meaningful war dont want to come home from this debacle. Try this simple experiment. Think about this one for yourself. I know its been a long time but try not to find out what your Limborg master WANTS you to think and consider for yourself if it is reasonable for someone to want to be a soldier but not blindly support ANY military misadventure. It will be hard, you are SOOO ignorant but give it a try.
As an ex-marine let me just say you can kiss my shiney white @ss. You have no clue and couldn't prove we hate the troops if you tried, you little goose stepping zyklon bnut you.
Snoopy just exposed himself as a phony Marine. Those who actually served in the Marines refer to themselves as former Marines, not ex-Marines.
Nope, I am a former marine. You once again have no clue what you are talking about.
Bunk my father was a 20 year Marine and a DI at Parris Island and after he left he called himself an ex-Marine
Wow, are you really that ignorant? Just because in your bloodlust and zeal to see as many Americans die as you can doesnt mean the moronic nonsense you just spewed makes any sense at all. I get that you HATE American soldiers and love to see them killed but even by that standard of stupidity your post was incredibly detached from reality. I can bash the Oxymoron anytime I want. He is a liar and a fool. Anyone who takes him seriously has a significant mental deficiency. We get you are a complete idiot and are motivated by your love of seeing Americans DIE but soldiers sign up to protect us. To protect what is crucial for our country, that is a noble thing, that doesnt mean when President Gump decides to use them in ways that have nothing to DO with what is crucial to our country that good men who would volunteer in a minute to fight a meaningful war dont want to come home from this debacle. Try this simple experiment. Think about this one for yourself. I know its been a long time but try not to find out what your Limborg master WANTS you to think and consider for yourself if it is reasonable for someone to want to be a soldier but not blindly support ANY military misadventure. It will be hard, you are SOOO ignorant but give it a try.
"I think everyone here is missing the point. If a soldier is against the war than he IS in fact a phony soildier..."
So, then you agree with Rush. Now we're getting somewhere.
Yes one wingnut so brainwashed and braindead he accuses us of preferring to see Americans shot in the head than protecting America agrees with Rush. You are welcome to agreement from moronic trolls like that.
"Now, let me just give you some background on this quickly."
when you hear these words from Fox, run!!
yeah, that's why Limbaugh edited the transcript on his website--to provide more background!!!
Only on FOX would one find an element of our society that would actually attempt to defend Rush......
These same clowns were so so willing to jump all over MoveOn.org for their comparatively lame ad but are beyond happy to jump to Rush's defense when he goes beyond the pale of claiming any soldiers that are against the war are "phony soldiers"
If Rush didn't mean it that way or doesn't believe what it was he said, his opportunity to make amends on that came and went after the end of his show the following day!
It is obvious that he is unwilling to admit that he is a false patriot and a lying sack...... hmmmm
That explains why FOX is willing to try and defend this piece of trash, makes sense........
I don't get it... what's the big deal? (I'll admit that a quick perusal of the thread didn't interest me enough to read in depth.) Looks to me that Limbaugh is simply ranting about anti-Iraqi soldeirs who wrote fake accounts.
Looks like a slow news day here. I suspect we'll see a worst-person thread pretty soon.
Hey speaking of Worst Person, anyone watch KO on Sunday Night Football.? Seems like more than once he's fumbled his answers. I've never seen KO so tongue-tied and ill-at-ease. That is more interesting to me than a statement made by Rush that he clarified in under two minutes.
You're soooo right. In fact this may be the most right thing I have ever seen you post. YOU DON'T GET IT. That's it. You really didn't need to write anything past that. You don't get it. That about sums up every post I see you write. You don't get it. So simple yet so elegant. You really just don't get it. At first I thought you were a troll, but now I know the truth. You just don't get it. Now I feel much better. And for the future just write that first it will save me so much time.
As I mentioned earlier, this thread did not interest me.
I am glad that some of you were able to do some chest thumping at my expense. Feel better? Good.
Pearlene, I know your response is below this one, but I am just going to express my appreciation here. Thanks for the A! It means a lot. :-)
ps. Am I the only one who watches Sunday Night Football?
Read some of the previous threads. It's been explained many times.
It's really not that complicated.
LOL
I don't get it... what's the big deal? (I'll admit that a quick perusal of the thread didn't interest me enough to read in depth.) AA
Looks to me that Limbaugh is simply ranting about anti-Iraqi soldeirs who wrote fake accounts.
That is more interesting to me than a statement made by Rush that he clarified in under two minutes.Notice how he repeats all of his Limbo “talking points word for word, right on target.
AA, when you tune into Rush tomorrow be sure to tell him you completed your homework assignment. You repeated word for word exactly what he told you to say. Tell him I'm a witness to your perfection and you should get an "A"!.
MMFA reminds me of the little sissy who got caught in a lie and now is accusing everyone else of lying.
It's pretty bad when the sissies with MMFA have to get phony war hero Tom Harkin to do their bidding on the Senate floor.
YOU remind me of all the other morons who are completly without the capacity to think for themselves and dont know WHAT they think until Limbaugh or another of the screechmonkey choir TELLS them what to think. Your ignorance is beyond compare. So NOW MMFA has Senators do their bidding? Who told you to think THAT? You are stupid kevin. I appreciate you coming here for comic relief humiliating and embarassing yourself just so we can laugh at you but at this point its getting kind of sad. Anyway its time for the adults to talk now so go play nice with the other special children
Solon,
I think you are being a little harsh. I can compare Kev's ignorance with AA's. And you really should not compare special needs kids with Kev. They deserve better. ;)
To AA/RinoHunter/Barney's credit, he did admit that reading is hard, so he didn't bother to read .
He did, however, have plenty of time and energy to post that he didn't understand the item (any connection to , admittedly, not reading it?hmmm), then quickly phony up a clumsy segue to criticizing Olberman, attempting to shift attention away from his disgraced overlord, The Oxymoron.
This is Rush's fan base.
Gomer,
I find it amusing again that you again are resorting to trollish behavior.
I don't know if you'll come back and read this as I am responding a day later. But for the record, you and I both know that I am not RinoHunter. So if you want to start your note off with a blatant lie, go ahead but being purposefully misleading is not one of your more endearing qualities.
As for reading comprehension, if you had any interest in being accurate, you'd notice I said I made a quick perusal. That means, that I read it lightly, not as you misconstrued, that I didn't read it.
As always I am happy to discuss as you can make some good points, but really, most of the time, with comments like this, you let me down.I stand corrected I guess Kevs ignorance CAN be compared to other cells of the Limborg hivemind
This from a moron who is spoonfed what to say from MMFA. Nevermind that the CEO of MMFA, David Brock, is a discredited journalist and admitted liar.
You're been played for an idiot by these sissies at MMFA and their puppet masters, Hillary Clinton and George Soros.
That's quite a "sissy" fixation you have there, Kev...saying it over & over is getting pretty wimpy & whiny. Please get some new material.
"In fact, when Limbaugh first used the term on the September 26 show, he had not mentioned MacBeth, and did not mention MacBeth until 1 minute and 50 seconds after he used the phrase "phony soldiers."
In fact, the sissies with MMFA are lying here. Limbaugh discussed MacBeth PRIOR to the "phony soldiers" comment.
I wonder if the sissies from MMFA will post the positive comments Limbaugh got today from real soldiers and their families.
Kevin,
Would you like to offer some proof? And what is up with your love of the word sissy? Does using it make you feel more manly?
Limbaugh talked about MacBeth during the previous day's Morning Update.
And if you think David Brock and Eric Boehlert are masculine, that says quite a bit about you.
And if YOU believe you think at ALL much less dont understand you are a moron then you are deluded to the point of lunacy
The fact that you believe a man can only be listened to if he is masculine says a lot about you. Most likely it says that you are not masculine or at least deep in side you do not feel masculine. I'm reminded of the Shakespeare line that reads "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." I'm sure you know what that means. I've never met David or Eric so I cannot comment on their masculinity. Either way I really don't care. I do care that they work hard to bring relevant issues to the table that we can discuss in public. Maybe you should figure out your own hang ups before you make more of fool of yourself.
Which of Mr. Edits' exact transcripts is the correct one? Let me know and I'll go by that one.
Aww, whatsa matter, widdow baby? Still can't accept the fact that Rush is lying to cover his pimple?
And why should we post a few responses from a few soldiers who come out of the blue and get their statements posted?
Hagel is a Vietnam War veteran, having served in the U.S. Army infantry, attaining the rank of Sergeant (E-5) from 1967–1968. While serving during the Vietnam War, he received the Vietnamese Cross of Gallantry, Purple Heart, Army Commendation Medal, and the Combat Infantryman Badge.
Sorry to butt in but calling that man a traitor with that service record does kinda indicate that you being on a special bus.
I listened to the Limbaugh comment when he mentioned the phony soldiers. This is something the Dems are trying to make a big deal about nothing. Wasting time on the floor of the Senate when of course they haven;t done anything else but name post offices. This is so stupid no wonder people hate congress.
Solon, I like your terms "hivemind" and "limborg" Seems like a limerick is lurking there somewhere...'cause the dittoheads really don't respond to valid debate, a little satire might be in order.
Satire works for me. A surealistic response, same. Nonesense for nonsense.
When Limbaugh the Borg queen says "boo"
The dittoheads parrot "me too."
There's no thought in hive mind
Of the rational kind
So we scrape their remarks off our shoe.
Very VERY good Mary. Bravo
I have posted a blog on my site at http://www.Punditorial.com as to why this whole thing isn't even an issue. It only takes a little bit of common sense to see what really happened here.
Not a very good attempt. Been debunked here on numerous threads. We have eyes & ears & a brain, unfortunately for Rush & the dittoheads.
While it's entirely possible that Limbaugh was also thinking of his obsession with a fake soldier, he clearly included other real soldiers who speak out against Bush policies as evidenced by his response to his caller. There is no way he can spin his way out of this.