Limbaugh v. the Left
I believed this was bullshit about his supposedly demeaning the military. It appears likely I was right.
http://radioequalizer.blogspot.com/2007/09/rush-limbaugh-phony-soldiers-flap-abc.html
Here's an excerpt from another post on the same blog:
Limbaugh's best point is this (Bill O'Reilly, take note): critics of conservative talk radio, especially in the mainstream media, never actually listen to these shows. They simply accept the Media Matters spin as gospel without actually tuning in. O'Reilly and Limbaugh cannot emphasize this point enough.Limbaugh was actually talking about the story of Jesse MacBeth, a fake "soldier" who never made it out of boot camp, yet was utilized by the anti- war left as a "veteran" who agreed with Iraq opponents.
Now, there are accusations all around that both sides have selectively edited audio and transcripts.
Considering MacBeth's conviction had just occurred and MacBeth was a loud, anti-war voice, I think if more likely it referred to him and the other handful of ex-military who have lied about their experiences in the Gulf to anti-war crowds and interviews.
Update:
Here's the transcript from MediaMatters:
CALLER 2: Yeah, and, you know what --
LIMBAUGH: "Save the -- keep the troops safe" or whatever. I -- it's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people.
CALLER 2: 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: The phony soldiers.
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.
Now, c'mon, you don't have to be a rocket scientist to surmise he was referring to, if not MacBeth, then any number of supposed Iraq war vets who have turned out to be phonies.
Yeah, the MM piece is a hit piece. Slimeballs.
Update 2:
So these guys are whom Rush was referring to. Yup, phony soldiers. Be fun to cross-reference this list with the speakers at antiwar demonstrations.
5 comments:
I can’t believe you’re actually siding with wart-butt Limbaugh on this one. If you want to cite the transcript of the conversation, you should read the entire thing, not that lame blog you link to. Here is more complete transcript:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270010
The reality is that Rush and the callers did not make one reference to folks impostering as soldiers. If you read through the conversations, the references to Phony Soldiers were clearly actual soldiers who chose to come to the media and express their concerns/disagreements with the war. The whole thing about fake soldiers such as Macbeth came out after Rush was exposed and he needed to spin things. Additionally, your blog references some ABC piece, which again has nothing to do with the conversation Rush is now backpedaling on. Should we really believe ABC News, the folks who host idiots like John Stossel. Even McCain and Romney don't buy the BS Limbaugh is trying to spread on this.
Personally, I agree with you 100% on the merits of freedom of speech – futility of congress to waste time condemning Rush and the MoveOn ad.
I'm glad we agree on Congress condemning free speech.
The ABC report came out a few days before Limbaugh's comments so there may have been an influence.
With conflicting transcripts and whatnot, I fall back on simple logic. Why would a man who's made 5 trips out to Afghanistan to rally the troops ding them? Makes no sense.
I remember the Michael J. Fox bruhaha and that Limbaugh essentially laughed it off. Not this time. I listened to the show for about 2 hours today and what I heard is a man who's genuinely upset and pissed off at what he believes is a mischaracterization.
I don't usually listen to Rush; I don't like his bombaste but I know righteous anger when I hear it.
As to ABC and Stossel - why is it with you lefties that those who disagree with you are "idiots"? Stossel has done some great investigative pieces.
A phony soldier chimes in here.
Regarding Stossel, yes he has done some very good investigative reporting in the past. But it seems of late, his focus has become more politically motivated than actually doing good solid reporting. Stossel’s hatchet job of Michael Moore’s recent movie Sicko was just a pathetic example of how his investigative skills have deteriorated. Take some of the responses made by actual doctors:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blake-fleetwood/doctors-blast-stossel-and_b_65346.html
Or even better, consider the response made by the wife whose now-deceased husband was featured in the movie Sicko. A good reporter would have done his homework and followed up with the primary source to get the true details instead of relying on suspect outdated studies and facts:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/09/18/wife-of-victim-from-michael-moores-sicko-responds-to-stossel-hit-piece/
OK, I'll agree with you on that. Stossel doesn't always do greta work.
Of course, the Dark Libertarian Covenant demands I defend Stossel.
Post a Comment