Tuesday, October 02, 2007

"Phony Soldier" to Rush: "Tell me to my face!"


James Young said...

Gee, I'll bet they're raising a lot of money on this.

Is this the guy to whom Limbaugh was referring? Or is this really contrived offense, just like your contrived outrage?

The Richmond Democrat said...

Well James you know very well that Rush and his supporters have made it abundantly clear that all service men or women who oppose the war are to be labeled "phony soldiers," even if they have served honorably and even been wounded or killed in action.

"Phony soldier" is an incredibly offensive term to apply to someone who has actually served and sacrificed for their country, don't you think? Yet the Republican Party seems bent on applying a litmus test: if you support the war you are a "good soldier," even if you're a draft dodging drug addict like Rush Limbaugh. If you oppose the war in Iraq, you are a "phony soldier," even if you win medals for heroism, were wounded in your nation's service, or even killed in action.

Limbaugh should have apologized, but like Bush he is incapable of admitting he makes mistakes. Now he has handed the Republican Party a tremendous black eye, and you can't spin it away.

Charles said...

I don't know of ANY republican, for or against the war, who thinks they way you accuse them of thinking.

I've never seen a reputable republican blog call a soldier "phony" simply for opposing the war.

"Phony Soldier" is an incredibly offensive term to apply to someone who has actually served and sacrificed for their country.

You expect someone to disagree with that?

Well, I might a bit. If someone who once served honorably were to do something really heinous, like accuse innocent soldiers of killing civilians in cold blood, and then hide from criticism by standing behind their prior military service, you might say they were being a "phony soldier" -- not for their past service, but for their current action.

I wouldn't, but I could see someone might.

But the claim that the "Republican Party seems bent on applying a litmus test" is absurd. Have you heard some of our elected Republicans? Some actually oppose the war, and you think the "Republican Party" calls soldiers "phony" simply for diagreeing with the war?

I have a young friend from my church who has been to Iraq twice. He did not support the war, but he did his job. He was critical of the way things were done, and I thanked him for his service.

My Brother-in-law is over in Iraq right now. I have no idea what his view is on the war, but if he told me he opposed it, I'd thank him for his service.

Rush is an entertainer, and plays to his audience. So he emphasises the cases where people have falsely claimed to be Iraq veterans. It's easy enough, the left has promoted more than one "phony soldier". I wouldn't have used the term, but when you see a group of "soldiers" marching against the war, and later find out they were civilians who bought 2nd-hand uniforms at a thrift store, you may find yourself refering to the "fake soldiers".

The sad thing is there are certainly real soldiers who serve in Iraq who oppose the war. We know of them, we honor them, even when they speak out against the war.

But the left gravitates toward the sensationalists, the ones who are willing to tell stories of war crimes, to rat out their fellow soldiers, to accuse their units and others of atrocities.

And it seems that sometimes those stories are made up, and sometimes by people who didn't server, like Jesse Macbeth.

So I might have a slightly more sympathetic consideration of the "outrage" over "phony soldier" if I had read a SINGLE virginia "progressive" blog condemning the left for falling for Jesse Macbeth, or a single democratic congressman standing up in the senate to denounce Macbeth for denigrating our soldiers.

Charles said...

To answer your question, James, NO. This is not the man, Jesse Macbeth, who Rush called a "phony soldier".

Nor, unless he lied to Rush, is he the caller Rush talked to BEFORE he made the "phony soldiers" comment, as that caller identified himself as Mike, not Brian.

So my guess is this Brian is just a real soldier who doesn't support the war, and therefore is NOT someone Rush was talking to, nor has ever talked about.

So there's no reason to expect Rush to call him Phony to his face, as he never called him phony, nor would he ever call him phony.

In fact, Rush is just as likely to offer Brian a free subscription to his premium service and the Limbaugh Letter.