Senate Dems go ballistic, misquote & attack Limbaugh on Senate floor

[Little-Acorn]

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Dick Durbin (D-MI) and others used a statement by radio host Rush Limbaugh to try to pretend he had disparaged our troops in Iraq, and then attacked him, calling him "unpatriotic" and claiming that he was lowering the morale of our troops fighting overseas.

In an earlier broadcast, Limbaugh had pointed out an NBC story about a member of the armed services who had written supposedly-firsthand accounts of our troops committing various crimes and atrocities, before it was revealed that the man had never been to Iraq or any other places where he claimed to have seen the acts take place. NBC called the man a "phony soldier" in their article, and Limbaugh agreed on the air.

Senate Democrats are now using this reference to try to claim Limbaugh had referrred to ALL our troops as "phony soldiers", and complained that his broadcasts were undermining troop morale in some way. They were careful to avoid mentioning Reid's own earlier comments that we had already lost the war, or other Senate Democrats' comments accusing some American troops of "terrorizing" women and children, and even commiting cold-blooded murder against Iraqi citizens - charges that have long been refuted.

The Democrats appear to be coming to the end of their string. After a large number of them refused to condemn a recent full-page newspaper ad by Democrat supporters MoveOn.org accusing Gen. David Petraeus of betraying his country, they apparently have no coherent response to growing awareness of their lack of commitment to victory in the war. All they can do is sieze upon clear, direct statements by their opposition, pretend the statements had said something else, and then bash the opposition for them. It must be particularly embarrassing for the Dems to have to accuse conservatives of things which, in fact, those Democrats themselves were guilty of (insulting our troops, undermining morale etc.) while the opposition was not.

It must be difficult to be a Democrat nowadays. The media is pointing out their actions more and more, and people are believing their words less and less. Today's amazing hysterics by leading Democrat on the Senate floor, gives further evidence why this trend is accelerating.

-----------------------------------------

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/democrats-go-after-limbaugh-2007-10-01.html

Democrats go after Limbaugh

By Klaus Marre
October 01, 2007

Democrats on Monday called on the chief executive of Clear Channel Communications to denounce remarks by radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom they say made a “hateful” and “unpatriotic” attack on U.S. troops opposed to the war in Iraq.

At issue is a remark from Limbaugh that characterized such troops as “phony soldiers.” Democrats have seized on the issue, allowing them to hit back at Republicans who similarly latched onto a MoveOn.org ad that referred to Gen. David Petraeus as “General Betray Us.”

“Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh’s unpatriotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in his letter to Clear Channel Chief Executive Mark Mays. “We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a ‘phony soldier.’ We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and to ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments.”

On his show Monday, Limbaugh blasted Democrats for their criticism, saying it is part of a smear campaign aimed at discrediting him.

“If anybody in this country has been trying to demoralize the troops, it is you, sir, and your members of the Democrat Party,” Limbaugh said. “You have waved the white flag of defeat.”


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

 

[CorpMediaSux]

The king of smear and misrepresentation is experiencing some of his own medicine? Let's all weep.

 

[Little-Acorn]

The king of smear and misrepresentation is experiencing some of his own medicine? Let's all weep.

The usual reaction of people who don't like what he says but can't refute any of it. Seems to be about the only response the Dems have left.

Sad.

 

[red states rule]

The usual reaction of people who don't like what he says but can't refute any of it. Seems to be about the only response the Dems have left.

Sad.

Where was the outrage over Sen Durbin comparing the US military to Nazi's and Pol Pot?

Or Sen Kerry calling the troops uneducated or terrorists?

The Dems ingore the fact ABC did a story on the phony hero 2 days before Rush mentioned it



ABC Reported on ‘Phony Heroes' Two Days Before Rush Limbaugh Did
By Noel Sheppard | September 30, 2007 - 20:54 ET

This is really hysterical, folks, and definitely requires all drinking vessels be properly stowed before continuing.

Just days before Rush Limbaugh was attacked by a number of press outlets for discussing "phony soldiers" on the air, ABC's Brian Ross did a segment on "World News with Charles Gibson" dealing with "phony heroes...scam artists...posing as the war heroes they never were, claiming credit for acts of courage in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Marvelously, this story was aired on Monday, September 24, just two days before Limbaugh made his comments. And, as noted in a NewsBusters posting by the MRC's Brent Baker, the report even mentioned the same "phony soldier," Jesse Macbeth (pictured to the right), that Limbaugh did on his program Wednesday.

Will media attack ABC with the same zeal they did Limbaugh? Maybe even more important, will House Democrats offer a resolution to condemn Ross, Gibson, and everyone involved in ABC's report?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...ted-phony-heroes-three-days-rush-limbaugh-did

 

[Stephanie]

And don't forget..the Democrats are again going after a Rush Limbaugh American Citizen...Just like they did with Ann Coulter American Citizen, Mike Savage American Citizen, anyone they don't like...Hell they even took down one of their own, Imus....he was a sacrificial lamb...

A vote for the Democrats, is a vote for Fascism..Just remember these episodes..

 

[actsnoblemartin]

the hypocrisy of the modern democratic party is so huge, it cant fit in one thread.

Where was the outrage over Sen Durbin comparing the US military to Nazi's and Pol Pot?

Or Sen Kerry calling the troops uneducated or terrorists?

The Dems ingore the fact ABC did a story on the phony hero 2 days before Rush mentioned it



ABC Reported on ‘Phony Heroes' Two Days Before Rush Limbaugh Did
By Noel Sheppard | September 30, 2007 - 20:54 ET

This is really hysterical, folks, and definitely requires all drinking vessels be properly stowed before continuing.

Just days before Rush Limbaugh was attacked by a number of press outlets for discussing "phony soldiers" on the air, ABC's Brian Ross did a segment on "World News with Charles Gibson" dealing with "phony heroes...scam artists...posing as the war heroes they never were, claiming credit for acts of courage in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Marvelously, this story was aired on Monday, September 24, just two days before Limbaugh made his comments. And, as noted in a NewsBusters posting by the MRC's Brent Baker, the report even mentioned the same "phony soldier," Jesse Macbeth (pictured to the right), that Limbaugh did on his program Wednesday.

Will media attack ABC with the same zeal they did Limbaugh? Maybe even more important, will House Democrats offer a resolution to condemn Ross, Gibson, and everyone involved in ABC's report?

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...ted-phony-heroes-three-days-rush-limbaugh-did

 

[Gunny]

Senate majority leader Harry Reid (D-NV), Dick Durbin (D-MI) and others used a statement by radio host Rush Limbaugh to try to pretend he had disparaged our troops in Iraq, and then attacked him, calling him "unpatriotic" and claiming that he was lowering the morale of our troops fighting overseas.

In an earlier broadcast, Limbaugh had pointed out an NBC story about a member of the armed services who had written supposedly-firsthand accounts of our troops committing various crimes and atrocities, before it was revealed that the man had never been to Iraq or any other places where he claimed to have seen the acts take place. NBC called the man a "phony soldier" in their article, and Limbaugh agreed on the air.

Senate Democrats are now using this reference to try to claim Limbaugh had referrred to ALL our troops as "phony soldiers", and complained that his broadcasts were undermining troop morale in some way. They were careful to avoid mentioning Reid's own earlier comments that we had already lost the war, or other Senate Democrats' comments accusing some American troops of "terrorizing" women and children, and even commiting cold-blooded murder against Iraqi citizens - charges that have long been refuted.

The Democrats appear to be coming to the end of their string. After a large number of them refused to condemn a recent full-page newspaper ad by Democrat supporters MoveOn.org accusing Gen. David Petraeus of betraying his country, they apparently have no coherent response to growing awareness of their lack of commitment to victory in the war. All they can do is sieze upon clear, direct statements by their opposition, pretend the statements had said something else, and then bash the opposition for them. It must be particularly embarrassing for the Dems to have to accuse conservatives of things which, in fact, those Democrats themselves were guilty of (insulting our troops, undermining morale etc.) while the opposition was not.

It must be difficult to be a Democrat nowadays. The media is pointing out their actions more and more, and people are believing their words less and less. Today's amazing hysterics by leading Democrat on the Senate floor, gives further evidence why this trend is accelerating.

-----------------------------------------

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/democrats-go-after-limbaugh-2007-10-01.html

Democrats go after Limbaugh

By Klaus Marre
October 01, 2007

Democrats on Monday called on the chief executive of Clear Channel Communications to denounce remarks by radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh, whom they say made a “hateful” and “unpatriotic” attack on U.S. troops opposed to the war in Iraq.

At issue is a remark from Limbaugh that characterized such troops as “phony soldiers.” Democrats have seized on the issue, allowing them to hit back at Republicans who similarly latched onto a MoveOn.org ad that referred to Gen. David Petraeus as “General Betray Us.”

“Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh’s unpatriotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast,” Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said in his letter to Clear Channel Chief Executive Mark Mays. “We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a ‘phony soldier.’ We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and to ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments.”

On his show Monday, Limbaugh blasted Democrats for their criticism, saying it is part of a smear campaign aimed at discrediting him.

“If anybody in this country has been trying to demoralize the troops, it is you, sir, and your members of the Democrat Party,” Limbaugh said. “You have waved the white flag of defeat.”


(Full text of the article can be read at the above URL)

This is surprising what way? Leftwing extremists will go to all lengths to try and sell people that they somehow "support the troops." The consquences for not doing have been all too clear in the backlash following Vietnam.

What goes around comes around.

 

[red states rule]

And don't forget..the Democrats are again going after a Rush Limbaugh American Citizen...Just like they did with Ann Coulter American Citizen, Mike Savage American Citizen, anyone they don't like...Hell they even took down one of their own, Imus....he was a sacrificial lamb...

A vote for the Democrats, is a vote for Fascism..Just remember these episodes..

So what else in new?

 

[red states rule]

This is surprising what way? Leftwing extremists will go to all lengths to try and sell people that they somehow "support the troops." The consquences for not doing have been all too clear in the backlash following Vietnam.

What goes around comes around.

This is a good example of how the extreme left "supports" the troops.

 

[CorpMediaSux]

Are people still clutching their pearls over poor abused Rush Limbaugh. Oy,now I remember what was so annoying about the 90s. Whiney right wingers who just couldnt accept the nation was increasingly uninterested in b.s. conservative politics. You guys had your 8 years and you so royally fucked yourselves it will be a while before you have majorities in either house or win the white house. I mean, yeah I guess crying over Rish Limbaugh IS more fun than groping with that real fact.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Are people still clutching their pearls over poor abused Rush Limbaugh. Oy,now I remember what was so annoying about the 90s. Whiney right wingers who just couldnt accept the nation was increasingly uninterested in b.s. conservative politics. You guys had your 8 years and you so royally fucked yourselves it will be a while before you have majorities in either house or win the white house. I mean, yeah I guess crying over Rish Limbaugh IS more fun than groping with that real fact.

You are either a total idiot or else you don't really believe in free speech.
This might help explain for you what is really going on:

Say Goodbye to Rush Limbaugh!

The recent attacks orchestrated against Conservative talk show hosts by the Soros-backed Media Matters for America, demonstrates eloquently what we can expect to happen in 2009 should Hillary -- or any Democrat for that matter -- win the White House in '08, and the Democrats maintain power in Congress.

What we have seen in the attacks against Bill OReilly and Rush Limbaugh are merely the first salvos in the war to return to the "Fairness Doctrine."

While (in the minds of liberals) there is complete fairness and balance of political thought on commercial television, dominated by ABC, CBS and NBC, talk radio still stands out (in their minds) as a stronghold of conservative bias. All efforts to balance out the talk radio airwaves, through programming such as Air America, have been met with bitter failure. Media giants like Clear Channel have unfairly blocked the liberal message from the public, through ratings based bias. Liberals see the failure of their message over the radio as intolerable -- and unable to win (as Rush would say) in the Arena of Ideas -- they seek to kill the messenger.

The weapon of choice is the so-called Fairness Doctrine!

Over the next year we can expect to see greater attacks orchestrated by Media Matters, and distributed by the MSM, just as we have recently seen in both the OReilly and Rush Limbaugh cases. In both cases, a sentence or phrase, taken out of context, has been turned into a MSM circus, used to demonstrate that the host is a racist-bigot-homophobe unfit to pollute the airwaves -- but since the American people are too stupid to stop listening to these people, the government will be forced to step in --in the national interest -- and impose censorship fairness.

In the words of a (in his mind) great American;

A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio and Clear Channel and Cooperstown. If you oppose this administration, there can and will be ramifications.

Every day, the air waves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent. And the public, like so many relatives and friends that I saw this weekend, sit in mute opposition and fear.

Once the Democrats attach themselves to power in the White House and Congress, you can expect that chill wind to become a northern gale worthy of the most dire predictions of Newsweek Magazine. Given the chance, the Democrats will return AM Radio to Top-40 format, and stifle any debate whatsoever over the airwaves.

After all, fairness dictates that only one voice be heard -- and that voice speaks the liberal mantra.

http://www.redstate.com/blogs/david_hinz/2007/oct/02/say_goodbye_to_rush_limbaugh

Quoting John Gibson:

This thing about Rush is really crystal clear. You can see how they lie. In this case, they said Rush said something, posted an audio recording of it and an audio transcript and cut it off at the precise moment where the next thing he said proved them wrong. Heres how it went down. I'll play this bit and you can hear what Media Matters posted of what Rush said and then I'll play you what he said next....the words that came next. The words that came right after they cut it off....and you will see...here...because this is radio...you will hear the live admission by this Soros backed group called Media Matters.

More Gibson:

...what Media Matters does is, by editing, makes Rush Limbaugh sound awful, leaves out the part where its clear what precisely he's talking about..not just people who he is categorizing, for convienience, as phoney soldiers, but adjudicated...imprisoned phoney soldiers. Media Matters left that out. That is a lie.


http://newsbusters.org/blogs/john-s...n-gibson-rips-media-matters-liberal-bias-lies

 

[CorpMediaSux]

You are either a total idiot or else you don't really believe in free speech.

Oh I'm sorry, I missed the part where lawmakers threatened to pull Rish Limbaugh off the airwaves through legal action or where they demanded he end his radio program. They critisized his statements. That's ALSO part of free speech. Rush Limbaugh has made an entire CAREER out of slander and libel, the examples are of course far too numerous to recount and I accept it because it's his right to act like an idiot on his radio show. Senate democrats probably did misquote him, but this is not a free speech crisis on any scale. Now to your media matters article:

This might help explain for you what is really going on:
edia giants like Clear Channel have unfairly blocked the liberal message from the public, through ratings based bias. Liberals see the failure of their message over the radio as intolerable -- and unable to win (as Rush would say) in the Arena of Ideas -- they seek to kill the messenger.

I happen to perosnally know Bob McChesney. Media Matters is NOT anti conservative radio. Media matters is anti corporate conglomeration of radio. You say that the issue is ratings, but the ratings only reflect a lack of options for people. Media matters thinks that there should be multiple DISTRIBUTORS of radio and television programming, they could care less what that programming says.

More importantly, when did "critiquing someone's views" become "an attack on free speech" in this country? Is anyone bringing O'Reilly before a senate committe hearing and calling him unAmerican? Is he being black balled? Is his license being revoked? Is Fox news being threatened with reprisal? Has he even loss advertising sponsors? No, no, a thousand times NO. Stop clutching your pears already.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Oh I'm sorry, I missed the part where lawmakers threatened to pull Rish Limbaugh off the airwaves through legal action or where they demanded he end his radio program. They critisized his statements. That's ALSO part of free speech. Rush Limbaugh has made an entire CAREER out of slander and libel, the examples are of course far too numerous to recount and I accept it because it's his right to act like an idiot on his radio show. Senate democrats probably did misquote him, but this is not a free speech crisis on any scale. Now to your media matters article:



I happen to perosnally know Bob McChesney. Media Matters is NOT anti conservative radio. Media matters is anti corporate conglomeration of radio. You say that the issue is ratings, but the ratings only reflect a lack of options for people. Media matters thinks that there should be multiple DISTRIBUTORS of radio and television programming, they could care less what that programming says.

More importantly, when did "critiquing someone's views" become "an attack on free speech" in this country? Is anyone bringing O'Reilly before a senate committe hearing and calling him unAmerican? Is he being black balled? Is his license being revoked? Is Fox news being threatened with reprisal? Has he even loss advertising sponsors? No, no, a thousand times NO. Stop clutching your pears already.

Since when did obviously false accusations (hardly "critiquing" as you put it) about talk radio hosts become a hot issue in Congress? Since they've decided to blackball them...which is obviously the plan...

You bet I'm worried....after the talking phase comes the doing...if the Dims get their way. Liberals do not believe in free speech...unless it's their own.

You're living in a dream world if you think the Fairness Doctrine will be "fair".

 

[Little-Acorn]

Oh I'm sorry, I missed the part where lawmakers threatened to pull Rish Limbaugh off the airwaves through legal action or where they demanded he end his radio program.

Of course you missed it. Easy to do with blinders on as tightly as you habitually have. See the so-called "fairness doctrine" that applies to conservatives who point out conservative things, but not to liberals who simply leave out conservative things.

They critisized his statements.

No, they lied about his statements. On the Senate floor.

That's ALSO part of free speech.

Wrong as usual. Your perfect 0-for-everything score continues unblemished.

(The rest of CMS's drivel deleted)

 

[CorpMediaSux]

Of course you missed it. Easy to do with blinders on as tightly as you habitually have.

I didn't miss it because it does not exist. Limbaugh was threatened with NO legal action and until you can provide evidence he was, his constitutional rights were not violated. You DO know how the constitution works don't you?

No, they lied about his statements. On the Senate floor.

Are you familiar with libel law, regardless of any semantic debate we have, there actions would not hold up in a court of law as libel or slander and you know it. Again, no evidence his constitutional rights were violated.

(The rest of CMS's drivel deleted)

Right, well I guess that's one way of admitting you don't have a response.

Originally Posted by Screaming Eagle
Since when did obviously false accusations (hardly "critiquing" as you put it) about talk radio hosts become a hot issue in Congress? Since they've decided to blackball them...which is obviously the plan...

You're not going to see me defending Congress wasting a single SECOND talking about Rush Limbaugh, I think it's a waste of all of our time to even be discussing him, he's fricking Rish Limbaugh. And I agree there seems to be a major attempt to misrepresent his views on the floor of the Senate. None of that, however, is illegal.

Now the issue of black balling. Have you read the proposed fairness doctrine, are you familar with the points of the legislation? I think it'd be a really good debate and I can't rely on Little Acorn to do things like read. If you want to talk about this potential law let's do it. The goal isn't to blackball its to end media monopolies which is a good thing for EVERYONE who doesnt want their news determined by the purse strings of Tide detergent or corporations that make profit off of war.

 

[Little-Acorn]

I didn't miss it because it does not exist. Limbaugh was threatened with NO legal action and until you can provide evidence he was, his constitutional rights were not violated.

Thanks for the classic example of a fanatic changing the subject when he's been proven wrong. Nobody said Limbaugh's constitutional rights were violated. I said he was lied about on the floor of the Senate, by leaders of the Democrat party. I don't blame you for pretending I said something else, though. As I said, it must be very difficult to be a Democrat these days - their agenda is unworkable, and their tactics indefensible. All they can do is change the subject - a desperate, last-ditch ploy that you seem glad to join.

Back to the subject: You have to wonder why Reid, Durbin, Harkin et. al. are doing this. They have to know exactly what Limbaugh really said, if for no other reason than to know what their rivals would reply. Plus, recordings of his exact words, context, etc. are available on Limbaugh's website, as well as other sites. It's easy to check, and to find out that Limbaugh never said our soldiers in general were "phony troops" - he was clearly talking about just one man, who did in fact put up phony accusations against his fellow soldiers. There's no way to get "our troops are phony soldiers" out of that... yet Reid and his cohorts claim to do just that.

Reid et. al. could have picked out literally anyone to disparage on the floor of the Senate. Is there someone who drove off a bridge and let an innocent girl drown in his car while not seeking help for 10 hours after the crash? Is there someone who plotted to frame a girl as a "stalker", until she produced a blue dress with his semen on it? Why didn't Reid go after them? Why did he have to invent a false charge that is so easily debunked?

The answer, IMHO, is because he had to do something to appease the increasingly-vocal kook leftist base of his party, who are disgusted with his failure to provide universal health care, surrender in Iraq, clean up Congress, or do any of the other things the Democrats promised in order to get elected in 2006. Attacking Limbaugh is free - the kooks will not care that the charges are obviously false, but will cheer stridently as they are made. This should buy Reid and his cohorts more time to do... something.

But what? They are no less incompetent and unproductive after the attacks than before them. They have still accomplished nothing. And the current 11% approval rating for Congress, means that more than just Republican voters are disgusted with them.

Congressional Democrats are between a rock and a hard place. They promised things they cannot deliver, and their basic philosophy (leftist big-govt control) has never worked in any other country and is no more likely to work here. But their base has had it with them, and are fed up with excuses, and want results. And the only thing Reid et. al. can offer, is distractions and false attacks against commentators they have been unable to refute.

As I said, it's very difficult to be a Democrat nowadays. But they have brought it on themselves. Listen to them howl as what went around, is now coming around.

 

[Mr.Conley]

I find it interesting that you all can accuse the Democrats of hypocracy on this issue with a straight face, especially after the MoveOn thing.

 

[jillian]

As I said, it's very difficult to be a Democrat nowadays. But they have brought it on themselves. Listen to them howl as what went around, is now coming around.

Er... the dems are situated to increase the majority in both houses and probably get the presidency. So, not so hard being a Democrat other than watch Bush humiliate himself for another 475 days. Being a republican must be torturous right now though if all you have to worry about is poor Rush baby getting his feewings hurt.

what part of Rush calling people "phony soldiers" who disagreed with Bush's war do you have a problem with him getting criticized for?

 

[CorpMediaSux]

Thanks for the classic example of a fanatic changing the subject when he's been proven wrong.

Um, my original contention was a: his rights aren't being violated and therefore b: what's the big hullabloo. You have actually addressed that finally though. Congrats.

As I said, it must be very difficult to be a Democrat these days - their agenda is unworkable, and their tactics indefensible. All they can do is change the subject - a desperate, last-ditch ploy that you seem glad to join.

I, at time, vote Democratic, but am not a Democrat. So couldn't really speak to that issue. Seems to me the Democrats are poised to win the next presidency and have a majority in both houses. But maybe those are my "blinders" again.

It's easy to check, and to find out that Limbaugh never said our soldiers in general were "phony troops" - he was clearly talking about just one man, who did in fact put up phony accusations against his fellow soldiers. There's no way to get "our troops are phony soldiers" out of that... yet Reid and his cohorts claim to do just that.

Now who's misrepresenting. Limbaugh is clearly implicating the hundreds of troops who have returned and joined the anti-war protest movement or have expressed dissatisfaction with the war mission. Did senate democrats take it a bit too far? Yes, did Rush attack anti-war troops? Also yes.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I find it interesting that you all can accuse the Democrats of hypocracy on this issue with a straight face, especially after the MoveOn thing.

What part of "he was talking about ONE man that WAS a phony soldier" do you not understand?