I have reached the tipping point in my absolute disgust for the Democrat Party. Not over taxes or fiscal policy. Not crime, nor any other domestic issue - on those I expect their mediocrity and failed programs, but NONE of these have driven me to believe this party is in its final throws as an entity to be taken serious as has their absolute disdain and open hostility to all things military, quite obviously born out of their opposition to all things Bush.
They have systematically decided to take apart anything, no matter how sacred, that has the potential to further show President Bush as incompetent. There is no institution nor issue too taboo for these slithering, fork tonged, heathens to attack or assail in the hopes of furthering their own political fortunes. It is my observation that they have surpassed making deals with the devil and have overthrown the prince of darkness himself, raising the serpent headed scepter high loudly declaring themselves the new rulers of the underworld.
Dick Durbin (D) IL has refered to the US military as "Nazi's", "Gulag" operators and has accused them of actions "reminiscent of Pol Pot's regime" while operating GITMO, all on the floor of the US Senate. John Kerry, also on the floor of the Senate commented, while offering no proof, that US troops have "kicked in doors of houses with families inside and terrorized the occupants." This in addition to his saying that "if you don't get good grades and go to college you end up in Iraq." Despicable, but it continues. Perhaps the most grievous offender is Jack Murtha (D) PA - he openly accused no less than a half dozen times, the US soldiers involved in the "Hadetha Incident", of being quote, "murders", and claimed on television that they killed innocents in "cold blood." He then tried to connect that accusation with his assertion that President Bush had so strained our military that they are cracking under the pressure, resulting in events such as this. 3 out of 4 of those soldiers indicted for the Hadetha incident have either been cleared of all charges, or had the charges dropped due to a lack of evidence, and the fourth appears to be headed in the same direction. Giving NO PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE for the men on the front line Mr. Murtha tried and convicted these men, offering no proof, in the media time and again - WHERE IS HIS APOLOGY NOW? Where is his Washington Post op ed retracting his absolutely deplorable statements now? In addition, Chuck Schumer (D) NY described US troops as ineffective on the Senate floor, "Let me be clear. The violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al-Qaida said to these tribes, 'We have to fight al-Qaida ourselves.' It wasn't the surge brought peace here, it was that the warlords took peace here, created a temporary peace here and that was because there was no one else there protecting [them]."
Add to this the absolute onslaught General Patraeus suffered at the hands of Democrat office holders during his recent testimony on Capitol Hill. One would expect that these war opposers would respectively and in reverent tones ask tough and poignant questions of a four star general whom is our current theater commander, but no. Wexler (D) FL yelled, raising his voice accusing the general of giving false hope and overplaying the successes. Diane Feinstien accused him of not being an independent evaluator, Harry Reid (D) NV, and senate majority leader, openly questioned his honesty when announcing, "we are concerned because things he has said in the past have turned out to not be supported by the facts." Did he give any facts, or specifics on just what the hell he was talking about? No. Of course not. In addition to their loathsome and disrespectful comments and questions to Patreaus they refused, in Hillary, Reid, Pelosi and Durbin, flat out refused, to condemn Move On.org for taking out a full page NY Times ad calling the general "General Betray-us" and accused him of "cooking the books for the administration." That is how much hate they hold for the president, they won't defend a 4 star general on active duty from absolute slander of the worst kind. Not even a single word and they now oppose congressional legislation meant to condemn the ad.
Then, low and behold, starting last Thursday they decided to come to the defense of the soldiers. Oh, not real soldiers mind you, but ones indicted, prosecuted and in some cases convicted by the US Military for fraud. Democrat Senate majority leader Harry Reid took to the floor of the US Congress in order to condemn, on the record, Rush Limbaugh for calling US soldiers that oppose the Iraq operation, "phony soldiers." In fact Reid knows full well that no such thing happened. Rush was describing the charges surrounding a man named Jesse MacBeth - he came back from Iraq and regaled leftist websites with stories of US soldiers raping Iraqi women, killing children indiscriminately, and executing unarmed captives followed by hanging their bodies from the rafters of Mosque's. These accusations were then translated into Arabic and repeated on no less than 100 Arabic language websites throughout the world. He was the golden child of "Move On" and others whom repeatedly told his stories. The problem was that MacBeth never went to Iraq. He washed out of boot camp and was subsequently charged by the military with falsifying documents in search of veterans benefits. Rush's comment of a "phony soldier" was specifically describing that man and further asking why Move On wasn't forced by the so called "main stream media" to retract their participation in spreading these lies. He further went on to describe any person who would fake combat veteran status as a "phony soldier." WHICH THEY ARE! The Army and Navy Times have printed articles in which they describe this scenario as spreading so fast that the US Congress is in the midst of passing new legislation to deal with it. At least 7 people In Virginia are under indictment now for defrauding the Veterans Administration.
Reid and his cohorts have time and again besmirched the US fighting man in their quest to stain the President, finding no line unworthy of crossing. They have the audacity to go to the floor of our Congress and introduce legislation castigating Limbaugh for calling active duty dissenters "phony soldiers", knowing he did no such thing. In participating in this lie they only further attempt to denigrate our Armed Forces. Instead of taking to the floor and condemning men such as MacBeth they knowingly repeat a false story about a radio commentator and claim they are doing so in defense of our military, this after 4 years of unyielding assaults on that very institution! Despicable. A pox on the lot of them. They aren't worthy of the congressional titles they hold. They seek defeat in the battlefield in order to gain victory at the voting booth - and do so shamelessly. They disgrace with their very presence a once great party defined by men such as FDR, Truman and JFK. The GOP has flaws too numerous to mention in one day, and I have been a vocal critic, but at least they have not disgraced themselves by attacking the US Military for political expediency. This is not partisan, this is not politics, this is about patriotism, and I stand here before you today to publicly and openly accuse the leadership of the Democrat party of unpatriotic actions in the performance of their duties. I accuse them of a verbal assault on our troops which is heard not only at home, but in the heart of the enemy's encampment. I accuse them of offering no support of the individual fighting man, and of openly seeking his defeat so that they might stand politically tall. The victory of our Armed Forces in theater runs a distant second, if at all, to their personal electoral fortunes. In war failure often means death, and they would gladly see just this type of failure befall the American soldier RATHER than run the risk of handing President Bush a political victory. They have actively sought to demoralize our forces, dishearten our allies and encourage our enemies.
History will not forget their disgrace.
FR
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
A resoundingly well written essay, my friend… well done, indeed.
I’m not going to even pretend to defend any of the Dems on this issue. Democrat or not, these Senators and Congressmen have a responsibility to the US Armed Services that they are NOT fulfilling at all… and I am ashamed of their conduct, in general and specifically in this instance.
I just can’t stand Limbaugh and his smug, “holier-than-thou” bullshit… so I’ll beat up on him instead, okay?
I know who Jesse MacBeth is… we call him “Jackpot Jesse” at work. I did not hear the Limbaugh show on the day this exploded, but the link to the right (in the Article of the Week section) has a good transcript of the caller (Mike) that prompted Limbaugh to say “phony soldiers”.
Limbaugh has said, at least four times, that his comment was in reference to Jesse MacBeth. However, MacBeth hadn’t been mentioned in the piece until two minutes AFTER Rush said “phony soldiers”… and Rush’s comment was in the plural, not the singular. Both he and the caller were laughing at the concept of the Dems finding “anti-war” soldiers to quote… and THAT is what he was referring to, in my opinion.
To help clarify this, Rush aired a “taped” version of the call-in discussion that prompted the uproar… and REALLY fucked up because he aired an “edited” version of the show that had dramatically reduced the time (by the entire two minutes) between the “phony soldiers” comment and the Jesse comments, hoping to make it look connected.
Rush is a hot-topic showman that will do anything to keep people tuned in, and he is undoubtedly loving this publicity. I think it goes MILES to show the kind of character he really has. He made snide and derisive comments about people that chose to voice an opinion contrary to his own, and is now denying that very act three hours a day, every day. He refuses to apologize to service men and women that might or might not be offended by his comment, and instead plays the media like a harp for money and ratings.
I’m certainly NOT going to listen to any critical remarks about soldiers, sailors, airmen or marines, now or in the past, who might wish to offer contrary or critical remarks concerning the state of their service or their actions therein from a man who beat conscription to Vietnam with a 4-F physical based on an ingrown hair… not a chance.
If Rush wants to see anti-war or anti-Bush soldiers questioned on talk radio… maybe he should let Ollie North or G. Gordon Liddy handle it, as they both served as active duty line officers in combat conditions and have the ribbons, scars and testicles to prove it.
Both also being convicted and admitted criminals not withstanding… hehe.
Yes, Ryan… the position of the Democratic Party in this regard is untenable and regrettable in the extreme. However, from what I have read and heard online concerning Rush’s comments… they’re right, and he is a prick that needs to apologize to the US Armed Services for saying what he said.
T
I have nothing to say about Limbaugh. My position on him and people like him has been stated.
Opposition to war without question has spilled onto veterans and active servicemen and women since the Mexican-American War in the 1840s. I am not excusing anyone either, this is by no means a defense of what the Dems are doing. But as a nation we've been doing this for almost 200 years, as sad as that is. There is nothing new about politicians stepping on the heroic service of volunteers and conscripts in their climb up the political ladder.
History also shows us that this doesn't work. So in the end these perpetrators cut their own throats. Worse, no one will remember Durbin or Murtha any more than people remember Gaylord Nelson, William Proxmire, Dave Obey or Tip O'Neil (sp?).
I appreciate the compliment from Titus. It's sometimes amazing how useful anger and outrage can be if properly channeled into the written word.
About that, the anger, what prompted the post was my outrage over the audacity of these elected officials to rush to the Senate floor (pardon the pun) in order to criticise a radio personality for what they translated as a slur, when they, the people whose actual job it is to support our troops, have purposely failed miserably at that task due to political goals.
About Rush in specific ... I don't expect for you Titus, or even Jambo to come Rush's defense. I know you don't like him an he's a big boy, and he has three hours of national air time to fight for himself, but I have been listening to his show since I was 19 (12 years), and since no one else will do it within our trimvirative, let me set the record straight on Rush .. for the Bund anyway.
Two days before the controversy on Rush's show ABC News aired a peice by Brian Ross, entitled "Operation Stolen Valor" in which Ross exposed how several men were falsely claiming to be vets and trying to get benefits based on that claim. In the peice the phrase "phony veterans" was uttered. That is where the phrase originated within the media, on ABC. Also, within the peice Ross focused on Jesse MacBeth. Now this scenario, of men claiming to be vets falsely, was of particular importance to conservative radio in general because the left-wing websites had been holding up Mac Beth as some whistle blower on how the military was really operating. Of course these stories had been floating before the ABC peice but it really got traction after a network news source aired it. So now this "jackpot" that Move On et al found themselves in, i.e. holding up mac Beth only to discover he was lying, was a semi important buzz all over talk radio and conservative sites for some time before Rush's 9/27/o7 program.
Okay, now to Rush's show on 9/27/07. A caller whom claimed to be a US soldier, named "Mike" called in and said quote, "What's funny is they [the left wing-media] never talk to any real soldiers, they like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue.."
Rush then interupts Mike and says, "phony soldiers."
Mike then says, "yeah, phony soldiers ..." and goes on with his criticism of the left-wing media in this country.
Now within a couple minutes of that exchange Rush comes on and says, "Here is a morning update we did recently talking about these fake soldiers, this is who the left props up as heroes. They have their celebrities and one of them is Army Ranger Jesse macBeth ..."
Alright, so he goes on for another couple minutes about how Mac Beth wasn't a Ranger at all etc. Did you notice what Rush said there? "A morning update we did recently .." I want to point that out because it demonstrates what I was saying before, this scenario of soldiers faking veteran status and then claiming war crimes were being committed on left wing sites was a story going on prior to the 9/27/07 Rush show, and Rush had already discussed it in days past via one of his "morning updates."
Okay, so what we have is this story (of "fake soldiers" who not only defrauded the VA, but were being trotted out by left wing media so they could tell of fake war crimes) being in play prior to Rush's 9/27 broadcast. Then on 9/27 Mike calls and refers to soldiers "that come up out of the blue", to which Rush ascribes the term "phony soldiers." Rush, about 3 minutes later in that same show where he first uttered the words then expands on that phrase by saying "Here is a morning update we did recently talking about these fake soldiers ..." And he goes into Jesse MacBeth.
The next day an avowed liberal site, Media Matters.Org, comes out and says Rush was describing any soldier who opposes the Iraq war, and the thing spreads like fire until it is what we have today.
He never, not once - and I watched the show on You Tube, and this was confirmed by the FOX News article you pasted - said that anti-war vets were phony soldiers. He was refering to guys like MacBeth (and yes the plural was appropriate because MacBeth isn't the only one, not by a long shot, to defraud the VA and garner some fame by telling fake war crime stories). So the context was this - the Macbeth angle was already in play within the media - especially right-wing media before his show. Within a few minutes of Mike's call Rush went into detail about whom he was referring to (Mac Beth et al), and mind you he did that BEFORE media matters reported on his comments and this became a controversy. His only error was in editing the two minutes between Mike's call and the MacBeth story, because the editing wasn't neccessary. By the end of the 9/27 broadcast - again, before it became a controversy - it was clear to anyone listening that "phony soldiers" was in reference to MacBeth and his ilk exclusively.
It is my opinion that Media Matters and scoundrels like Reid took it completely out of context and propped it up so as to deflect the heat they were getting from not condemning the Move On "general betray-us" ad.
Does Rush routinely mock and ridicule those on the left and even some Republicans"? Yes. Do you hate the man? Yes. Has he ever referred to anti Iraq war vets as phony soldiers? No. Not even once. As I have demonstrated the claims that he did are completely out of context, thus an apology is unwarranted. In fact Reid et al should be apologizing for the numerous times they DID slur the US Military both in words and actions, rather then sending a letter to the prresident of Clear Channel asking him to force an apology out of Rush.
And let me add this ... do you know what the #1 rated show is on Armed Forces Radio? That's right boys and girs, The Rush Limbaugh Show. So before Reid, Hillary, and Schumer decide to speak on behalf and in defense of our fighting men, maybe they should see if their ratings are as high within the military as are Rush's. I sincerely doubt it.
FR
By the way ... I posted another comment regarding "Caustere" under the Space Losers post.
FR
Just a quick addition to this Rush situation. Many Democrats have tried, uneffectively in my estimation, to compare what Rush said to Move On's full page NY Times ad (Patraeus/"Betray-us"). The comparison is silly and not even close if you ask me, and the DEMOCRAT controlled senate would seem to agree with me. From CNN ...
"Last week, the House of Representatives voted 341-79 to condemn the group's newspaper ad that was titled titled "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" The Senate also approved a resolution condemning the ad 72-25."
That was the vote condemning the Move On ad. The letter that majority leader Harry Reid sent to the Clear Channel chairman(asking the company to condemn Rush), with all his arm twisting and influence as leader, was only signed by 41 Senators total! Meaning some Democrats didn't even buy into this "controversy." And what was the senate tally condemning Move On? 72? They're not even close and it's phony controversy, and the majority in the Dem controlled senate seems to agree.
FR
Post a Comment