‘Phony soldier’ responds to Rush.
By on Oct 2nd, 2007 at 11:31 am
‘Phony soldier’ responds to Rush.
In a new Vote Vets ad, Brian McGough, an Iraq war veteran who received the Purple Heart, challenges Rush Limbaugh: “Until you have the guts to call me a ‘phony soldier’ to my face, stop telling lies about my service.” Watch it:
View Most Popular
Advertisement
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
Reports
In depth studies on select topics
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bailout
Big Oil
Bolton
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Earmarks
Economy
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Global Warming
Guantanamo
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iran
Iraq
Justice
Kristol
LGBT
Lieberman
McCain
McClellan
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Rice
RNC Convention
Rove
Terrorism
Third Bush Term
Torture
Veterans
Wiretapping
Women's Rights
Archives
Simple, effective, and outstanding. Mr. McGough can hold his head high as an authentic hero. His is the face of true patriotism.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:34 ami emailed rush and asked if he would tell it to that soldiers face….. you’ve been called out blowhard, step up!
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:34 amlol
liberals grasping straws again :)
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:38 amCyst lickers unite! Your windbag is being called out, leap to his defense!
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:39 amPugil sticks at two paces, lardass.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:39 ampimpdaddywelfare sez:
That didn’t even make sense.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:41 amliberals grasping straws again :)
Comment by pimpdaddywelfare
What does Rush’s ass smell like, brownie?
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:41 amSomeone should get a camera and engage in a little of the “ambush journalism” that has made Bill-O such a media darling. I’d love to see that pompous windbag puff and wheeze after being surprised.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:42 am“What does Rush’s ass smell like, brownie?”
Comment by barfly — October 2, 2007 @ 11:41 am
My guess would be that it smells suspiciously like Darth Cheney’s wang.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:43 amRush has guts. Great big gobs of greasy grimey gopher guts….
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:52 amAs we all wait for the mutilated monkey meat………
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:54 amliberals grasping straws again :)
Comment by pimpdaddywelfare — October 2, 2007 @ 11:38 am
Why do you hate our troops?
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:55 amLimp and his ilk are all alike, their purpose is to incite the public and raise their low rating’s…They are nothing but scum and don’t diserve our time..This evil wind bag is still the only person I know with 3 butt’s, one on his face and 2 on his back side…
I wonder what desk he will be under if there is a revolution he has helped to start right here in the good old USA…My guess, he will looking for little george and the dick to save him…..Another fat chance, they all would be under the same desk…Sharing drug’s and booze…Watch out for the bosses shot gun fat boy……Blessings
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:57 amRush would pee his pants if he had to face a real veteran face to face and defend his slurs.
October 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 amRush
Bush
Turds of a feather stick together.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:02 pmwillieboy on joe scarborough’s morning show was spinning like a weasel this a.m. in rush’s defense. rush was referring to the tnr phony soldier who provided those questionable stories about u.s. soldiers committing crimes. rush wasn’t disparaging the soldiers — just this one phony one…
your national media in action.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:03 pm16, Rory,
Are you aware Rush was the first to use the term ‘Betray Us’?
He used it in January of this year.
Speaking of phony soldiers, see #15.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:03 pmRush would pee his pants if he had to face a real veteran face to face and defend his slurs.
Comment by Wayne — October 2, 2007 @ 11:59 am
Rush won’t face a real veteran, unless it’s a dittohead. But he also won’t put himself in ANY position where he has to explain or defend the hot air he spews. I have never seen him on a discussion panel where there are both conservative and liberal voices present. I have never seen him as a guest on anybody else’s talk show (unless it’s something so right-wing I won’t watch it). Rush won’t step out of his safe little broadcast booth where he is in complete control. Rush is a coward.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:05 pmwhat’s the latest on Reid’s condemnation measure? have Republicants suddenly lost their anger over disrespect of the military?
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:05 pmtroll proof fact: rush ducked service because of a pimple on his ass.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:06 pmThe MSM will never report this story accurately, so the true hero soldiers (and their supporters) have to pay money on an ad to tell their story and call out the right-wing chickenhawks for who and what they are. How sad is that?
Still, keep up the good work. Hmmm.. I wonder if right-wingers will spit on the soldiers who are against the war when they come home? You know, like all the anti-war protesters NEVER DID back in the 60s but the right wing somehow got that myth established as history?
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:06 pmDemagoguery and character assassination–by their acts we shall know them. Cowards who wrap themselves in the flag and sully the good service of others should be easily detectable by that odor of mendacity.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:07 pm23, well said, Doc Rock.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:09 pmLike a purple heart means anything to chickenhawks on the right. They willingly dole out all the purple hearts they can to people who actually do the fighting (which they NEVER would - way below them, don’t cha know) and then just as willingly say the purple heart wasn’t deserved; the soldier, sailor, airmen or marine didn’t do anything to deserve it (losing a leg, arm, or brain matter? C’mon, they WANTED that to happen so they’d have a soapbox! They’re not REAL military. The REAL military just go and die so we don’t have to listen to them complain! Anyone else is PHONY, PHONY, PHONY!)
That’s their gameplan vis a vis Swiftboating or whichever other means they manage to lie and smear people who really did serve. And they are cheered on in doing so.
When did supporting the military become game sport against those who actually do support them? When did it become acceptable to not just grudgingly allow people to disparage what is simply common sense but to encourage them to blatantly lie - and get a commendation to boot?
What has happened to my country?
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:15 pmI don’t think that Rush Limbaugh ever called Brian McGough, or any other veteran who received the Purple Heart, a ‘phony soldier.’
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:02 pm
Sorry, I listened to the original recording and read the original unedited transcript. Your defense falls short.
He did not make a distinction until much later in the show. He called any soldier that speaks out against the war a “phony soldier” and all the spin in the world from you freaks doesn’t change that fact.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 pm> or any other veteran who received the Purple Heart,
>a ‘phony soldier.’ He was referring to actual PHONY soldiers.
Like Murtha, who had 2 purple hearts and another medal for valour in combat?
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:16 pmno need to answer “rory” im sure im on your “ignore list” ™
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:17 pmWhat a great advertisement.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:20 pmHow about Rush stop telling lies, period.
∞
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmhttp://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298858,00.html
On his Friday show, Limbaugh also referred to Scott Thomas in a discussion of “phony soldiers.” Thomas was caught falsifying accounts of war atrocities in The New Republic magazine. In the next breath, Limbaugh, in his usual combative style, then took aim at Rep. John Murtha, a Vietnam war veteran and strong antiwar politician who on Friday was ordered to give a deposition in a defamation case against him for suggesting that U.S. Marines were involved in “cold-blooded murder and war crimes” in Iraq.
“How about Jack Murtha blanketly accepting the notion that Marines at Haditha engaged in wanton murder of innocent children and civilians?” Limbaugh asked.
Mollineau said the Murtha reference proves that Democratic interpretations of Limbaugh’s comments are correct.
“I think it proves our point that he was talking about more than one person when he brought up Jack Murtha,” he said.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pmRory,
You actually looked that up to defend this bloated drug-addicted windbag? Man you are pathetic.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:23 pm“Rory” sez:
Here you go, Shakey..
Sheesh, Jake….do you think that you might be able to create an alternate identity that’s capable of doing its own homework?
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:24 pmLook up “inoperable Pilonidal disease.â€
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
More like “head inserted in ass” disease.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:25 pmTMM ~ Don’t effing count on Jake doing anything but blathering the usual Rushified talking pernts.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:26 pmComment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
Ah, yes…Kingston. The same jackass who intentionally referred to Democrats as “Demoncrats” on his web page. Thanks, Shakey. That’s the best laugh I’ve had all day.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:28 pmRUCerious sez:
Yup…I had hoped that “Rory” would have the courage to address me directly, but apparently, Shakey’s cowardice is transferred to his alternate identities…
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:30 pmI’ve read the transcript over and over. It’s very clear that the caller was describing soldiers who are opposed to the current policies as phony soldiers. And Rush knew it, by responding with the plural “phony soldiers.” The caller followed up with “real soldiers want to be there,” making it clear he was distinguishing real from phony based on a soldier’s support for the mission, not talking about Jesse MacBeth. Again, Rush agreed with the caller’s assessment - real soldiers “joined to be in Iraq.” The discussion of Jesse MacBeth came much later, although Rush edited the the tape and transcript to make it appear the Jesse reference occurred immediately after he said “phony soldiers” and after the caller had hung up.
There was nothing out of context in the reporting of the remarks, despite what Willie Geist and Joe Scarborough claim.
The most amazing thing about discussions of what happened here is how the threads about the phony soldiers comments were devoid of Rush defenders - because really, even our favorite republican posters couldn’t defend it. I joked at the time that they must be waiting for their marching orders from Rush. And sure enough, as soon as Rush came up with his phony excuse, they reappeared, dittoing happily.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:30 pmComment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:24 pm
If congress really gave a damn they would stop the silly resolutions and actually do something about the way veterans and wounded are getting shafted. They would bring back the yearly meetings with Veteran Groups, the Rubberstampers stopped to avoid “embarrasing the President”. And there is alot more they could do, rather than pass silly non-binding resolutions.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:32 pmI am not Jake, and I didn’t hear that show, so thanks for the info. Assuming the excerpts quoted are accurate, that’s no worse than MoveOn.org ASKING “General Betray Us?†At least Murtha is not active-duty combat.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
So you’re saying it’s ok to attack the honor of former soldiers, no problem? As for being ‘no-worse’, then you agree with the Congress treating it the same way, with a censure of Rush?
The hypocrisy and double standard of Republican values is exactly why you find yourself such a second-tier political movement now. Thanks for showing that this runs to the core of the voters, not just the party leadership.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:33 pmI will stick with the actual medical diagnosis for my debate point, thank you very much.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
That was my diagnosis of your disease.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:33 pmRush Limbaugh is definitely not active-duty military (like 99.7% of Americans). Does that disqualify his opinions? As for his “pimple†it was a bit more serious than that. Look up “inoperable Pilonidal disease.â€
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:17 pm
Well at this point he’s fat enough to be two active duty soldiers, but come on. You wingnuts have been faking diseases for decades, no one believes Rush’s disease. The only inoperable disease he has is the one he shares with you, foot in mouth disease!
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:35 pmOh, fine. Thanks, DR. Wayne.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
Sure Dr. Rory, when was the last time you examined Rush’s *ss? Because if you haven’t, then your hypocrisy is another fine example of GOP values.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:36 pmI think I registered and started defending Rush here at ThinkProgress on 9/26/07. Wasn’t that the SAME DAY as the show?
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:33 pm
I don’t know, Rory. Which name were you using to defend Rush on the Rush phony soldier thread?
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:41 pm“Rory” sez:
Well well…finally smoked you out, I see.
Liar.
If you had actually read the ad in question (past the title), you would realize exactly what the difference is.
For God’s sake, Shakey, educate yourself.
Two things wrong with that statement, Shakey.
First, why do you think it’s somehow OK to slander a serviceman when he’s no longer on active duty? Explain your reasoning.
Second, Betrayus is telling those lies right now. People are dying because of those lies right now.The time to refute them is now, not when he retires.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:42 pmI am not Jake, and I didn’t hear that show, so thanks for the info. Assuming the excerpts quoted are accurate, that’s no worse than MoveOn.org ASKING “General Betray Us?†At least Murtha is not active-duty combat.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 12:30 pm
And tell us, Rory, why MoveOn suggests that the general “betrayed” us. I can get you started with these 2 hints:
1. Actually read the ad.
2. Consider these definitions of the word “betray” because your right-wing flunkies all across America who are going after MoveOn conveniently ignore them:
- To be unfaithful in guarding, maintaining, or fulfilling.
- To deceive, misguide, or corrupt.
- To be false or disloyal to.
- To lead astray; deceive.
- Cause someone to believe an untruth.
October 2nd, 2007 at 12:59 pmIF, in the highly unlikely event that fat-ass feels anything like guilt, a couple of hundred milligrams of Oxy-C. will get him back to “normal”.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:16 pmtoo bad somebody couldn’t get his fat ass hooked on China White, eh?
Too bad if, …………..
nah, better not say it.
“Rory” sez:
No, you haven’t.
Yes, you are.
Every time you try to lie about your real identity, Shakey, I’m going to come along and call you on the lie. I told you once before that writing styles are like fingerprints, and it’s obvious who you are as soon as your fingers touch the keys. I’m not the only one who has recognized your hand.
BTW, I noticed that my assertion as to your true identity is the only thing you replied to. Are you busy actually reading the Petraeus ad, then?
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:16 pmshort and to the point. Something rush has never been accused of doing.
Great statement.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:20 pm“Rory” sez:
Glad to know I have your permission, Shakey. I can sleep tonight, now. ^_^
Then by all means, defend him. You can start by answering the question I posed to you earlier: Why do you think it’s somehow OK to slander a serviceman when he’s no longer on active duty?
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:26 pmComment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
Why yes, I believe it was. Do you agree with their implications…that the “books were cooked”…or not? Do you agree that we as Americans have a right to question those in a leadership position? Just curious.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:28 pmIt’s amazing how even when confronted with actuall clips and transcripts the rightwing sociopaths will STILL continue to deny they say things. What a bunch of sick freaks.
http://www.leftopia.blogspot.com/
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:28 pm“Rory” sez:
Charming, Shakey. Absolutely scintillating.
Now that you’ve gotten that out of your system, perhaps you could return to your stated goal on this thread: defending Rush.
Why do you think it’s somehow OK to slander a serviceman when he’s no longer on active duty?
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:29 pmThere’s a big difference between criticism of the policies and practices of Generals, who are responsible for the lives of thousands of troops, and criticism of the personal views of soldiers who are carrying out the policies of said Generals to the best of their abilities.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:32 pmTracy, you should ask Bush about slandering McCain, he did a great job of it in South Carolina in 2000.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:36 pm“Are the members of our National Guard not “real†soldiers to you?
Comment by Rory ”
They are now, but when bush “served” the national guard was a way for the sons of the powerful to avoid military duty. Sons from both sides of the aisle. the Sons of Connelly and Benston, both Texas dems “served” with bush in his nat guard unit. If you think serving in the national guard is the same now as it was 40 years ago, explain this: there were 94 guardsmen died in Vietnam. how many have died in Iraq?
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:39 pm“Rory” sez:
And yet you continue to defend him. Make up your mind.
Sure…why not. (Interesting how you put “defending” in quotes, BTW.)
Let’s start with this one:
In tis post, you are clearly making the case that slandering someone not on active duty is better than slandering someone on active duty. Again, explain your reasoning.
Also, go back and read the moveon.org ad in its entirety (I believe I was even so good as to furnish you with a link), and then tell me precisely which part of the ad was “slander”.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:41 pmHeh…Krazny, you beat me to it. ^_^
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:42 pmI LOVE Rush, especially Geddy. He looks like a lberal too.
October 2nd, 2007 at 1:43 pmNo, BadEye.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 1:30 pm
“No” to both questions? So it’s OK to skew the level of violence by discounting certain causes of death while counting others, just to make things look better? If one of our service members is captured and shot in the forehead, instead of in he back of the head, is it OK with you that we don’t count that death? Does it make you feel better about this “war” when all of a sudden the deaths of thousands of Iraqis don’t count any more? I’m sure somewhere, sometime, Bush has said that he cares about our troops and cares about the innocent Iraqi people and the level of violence they face, yet when it comes to acknowledging their deaths, all of a sudden it’s not so important.
As for questioning our leaders, are you saying never? Never ever?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:02 pmBad Eye:
Did I misread your post above, or weren’t you agreeing with me that the MoveOn.org ad was an implication that General Petraeus betrayed the American people?
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 1:49 pm
Well, duh, it certainly appears that the ad was saying the good general misled America. I happen to agree with MoveOn.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:08 pm“Rory” sez:
Sorry to disappoint you, Jake. I’m sure you would prefer it if I left you alone. Sadly, that’s not gonna happen.
You don’t think labeling a serviceman as a “phoney soldier” is slander?
First, if you’re going to hide behind the MoveOn.org ad in this manner, you don’t get to say anything against it anymore. You can’t have it both ways, Shakey.
Second, his implication was clear…just as clear as MoveOn.org’s was.
Third, the difference between MoveOn.org’s questioning of Betrayus’ honor and Rush’s vile slandering of Murtha is simple: facts. The facts are on MoveOn.org’s side, and they are not on Rush’s side. You’d know this if you actually read the ad.
(BTW, Shakey, I haven’t yet heard your reasoning on how slandering a soldier not on active duty is better than slandering one on active duty…don’t duck the question.
You can count on it, Jake. You can take that to the bank.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:09 pm“Rory” sez:
Isn’t that cute? Shakey Jake is trying to invoke Article III, Section 3 of the Constitution again. Let’s see if his newest incarnation understands it any better than his previous ones did.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:10 pmThat’s the problem with compound questions; I do think it’s OK to question leaders, but there’s a line that shouldn’t be crossed. I don’t think it’s OK to give aid and comfort to the enemy during wartime.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
How is it that the ad gives aid and comfort to the enemy?
And who determines what the line is that is not supposed to be crossed? General Petraeus? President Bush? Sen. Cornyn?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:12 pm“Rory” sez:
That’s not an answer, jackass, and you know it. I answered your questions, answer mine.
Running away already, Shakey? That didn’t last long.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:18 pmWait a sec, Bobwurst. The National Guard is great now, but was a way for the sons of the powerful to AVOID military duty back then? How then did 94 Guardsmen die in Vietnam? Did those 94 die before or after Bush served in the Texas Air National Guard? As I understand it, no one was being sent to Vietnam when Bush allegedly went AWOL. You are not really calling Bush a “phony soldier†are you?
As for “how many [Guardsmen] have died in Iraq?†is it more than 94?
Comment by Rory
Yes, I am saying that bush is a phoney soldier. he chose the safe path in Vietnam, which, given the context of the times is what it is. What isn’t ok is that he went AWOL, and paid no consequences. Then,hHe lied about his service when asked, and nobody cared. He claimed that he didn’t take his physical in 72 because his personal doctor was unavailable when it was national guard policy that a military doctor perform the physical.
My point about the guard deaths in Vietnam is that out of 58,000 plus deaths, 94 were guardsmen, a pretty safe ratio.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:19 pmBush is at least as phoney as Murtha. bush is the one who dressed up as a pilot to get ferried out to an aircraft carrier. Are you saying that wasn’t phoney? Rory? Jake?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:22 pm“…When Bush allegedly went AWOL. ”
Rory
If bush didn’t go AWOL where are his discharge papers? Where are the offical military records that show he was discharged? Where are the offical military records that show he reported for duty at Otis Air National Guard Base on Cape Cod when he was allowed to go to Harvard?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:26 pm“Rory” sez:
He posts every time you hit ‘Post - I agree’, Jake.
You’re not fooling anybody.
Also, your attempt to use this issue to evade further debate on the topic is quite eloquent in and of itself.
I answered your questions. Answer mine.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:27 pmBush is a phoney soldier because he dressed up like a fighter pilot when he was the president of the United States. Bush took the easy way out when he pushed his way to the front of the line in Texas and as a result of that someone took his place in the regular miliatary and most likely went to Vietnam in his place. Bush is phoney, period. he is a phoney conservative, a phoney compassionate conservative, a phoney christain, a phoney texan, and yes, a phoney guardsman.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:29 pmI just call ‘em like I see ‘em, Bad Eye. You will never see me carrying on with ANYTHING that I consider giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
What’s wrong? Can’t answer the question? Is it that difficult? Or is the answer so obvious that you can’t admit it?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:30 pmBobwurst:
Perhaps you should ask Dan Rather.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 2:28 pm
Translation: I can’t answer the question.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:32 pmBobwurst:
Perhaps you should ask Dan Rather.
Comment by Rory
your argument is completly beside the point, as you well know. As well as your comment about who has a job and who was selected in 04.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:32 pmIf rather was wrong, then the first response from the Whitehouse would have been a strong denial not a “we think the document may be a forgery”
You will never see me carrying on with ANYTHING that I consider giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
Comment by Rory
So, you agree that bush letting binladen escape in torabora is shameful?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:33 pmComment by Bobwurst — October 2, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
Perhaps more to the point: the information contained within the document was never questioned. Correct?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:34 pmre bad eye.
Yes, that too. the entire affair was a perfect example of right-wing mis direction.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:37 pmHell, even Melanie Morgan agrees with what we are saying here. From a new thread on TP:
On Fox News’ Hannity and Colmes last night, right-wing radio host Melanie Morgan said Rush Limbaugh was “accurate†when he said that service members who support withdrawal from Iraq are “phony soldiers.â€
Melanie needs to get with the program. Come on, Tracy, you going to call her out on this?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:37 pmComment by Bobwurst — October 2, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
Yep.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:38 pmmelanie morgan must be a liberal?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:39 pmI wouldn’t use the word “shameful.†Hindsight is 20/20, and mistakes are made in every war; even D-Day wasn’t 100% success. Are we sure than bin Ladin is even alive
Rory,
Funny, everytime bush needs a bump in the polls another vidieo gets released. Are you questioning the veraicty of these threats?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:43 pmSionce yer back Rory, how about addressing morgan’s statement (see post #106) that rush was ACCURATE “when he said that service members who support withdrawal from Iraq are “phony soldiers.†?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:46 pmOh, Rory-
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:46 pmYour defense of Limbaugh is SHAKEY to say the least. Just like Bill-o, Rush is crying that his statements are being “taken out of context”(your defense also). However, just like Bill-o, Rush has not posted his statements on his website in full context. Why might this be? Maybe because taken in full context, neither have a leg to stand on. In the case of O’Reilley, the full transcription of his statements actually make him sound WORSE than was originally reported. Limbaugh’s statements, when read in FULL CONTEXT do nothing but PROVE the intent of his statements. It’s the Rights (and also Nazi Germany’s) MO to repeat the lye over and over untill hopefully enough people think it’s true. They’ve been making a living off of this deceitful tactic for what seems like forever and you poor 28 %ers fall for it EVERY TIME! Fortunately, America seems to be waking up from their long peaceful sleep and seeing the Right for what they truly are…deceitful liars who call themselves patriots while working to undermine all that is true and good in this Nation! We’re not taking the Right’s crap anymore but if you still want to swallow their bullshit, be my guest. Just don’t come here thinking you’re going to change any minds with your lame defense of that treasounous pill-popping blowhard. So drink your kool-aid, stick your head back in the sand and wait for your Dear Leader to tell you to come out when he’s made the world safe for Democracy!
Well, “Rory”, it looks like I’m on Ignore List 2.0.
What a coward. How can you stand to look at yourself?
Ignoring me didn’t work last time, Jake…what exactly makes you think that ignoring me will make me go away this time around?
Care to answer my questions now, or do I have to hound you some more?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:46 pmWhat’s amazing to me is that JUST yesterday they were arguing that Rush didn’t say the soldiers are phoney, because obviously they knew it was a bad thing to say. Yet today, Melanie Morgan comes on and says hellz yeah they’re phoney and now it’s not only OK to say it, but SAY IT LOUD!
That’s a 180 degree reversal in just 24 hours. I can’t keep up with the rightwing mind. If there is one.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:46 pmI thought the left-wing wackos were questioning the veracity of the bin Ladin videos. I, on the other hand, believe there are still terrorists trying to kill Americans.
Comment by Rory
Are we sure than bin Ladin is even alive
Rory,
So, what’s your point rory?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:47 pmRory, just tell us if it’s good or bad to label any American soldiers as phoney. It’s a very simple question. Good or bad?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:48 pmkudos to lefty for bringing the thread back to ground with a simple question. rory, is it ok?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:49 pmRory, if you’re at a loss for words right now, try the “clinton did it” response.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:50 pmIs it right or wrong to call any American soldier a phoney?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:53 pmComment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 2:40 pm
Well, if you want to call a non-answer an answer. So you accuse the MoveOn ad of giving aid and comfort to the enemy, which suggests some kind of thought process on your part, yet you can’t explain it? You cannot answer “why?”
You remind me of my mother-in-law, bless her heart, who also runs from any questions I throw her way when she makes wild-ass accusations. She responds in one of three ways: she says “I don’t know”; she turns and walks away without answering; or she walks away and goes to her room and shuts the door, just like a spoiled little brat-child.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:53 pmI’m just asking someone who’s supposed to have moral clarity a really simple judgement question. Right or wrong, Rory?
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:55 pmI agree with Rush that MacBeth was a phony soldier, so no, I don’t think it’s wrong to point that out.
Comment by Rory
Dude, come on. You have one last chance to answer the question or I’m not wasting my time talking to you. That was really weak. I’m being totally reasonable here and you know what I am asking you.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:57 pmI’m ashamed of being a liberal. I cry a lot too with my boyfriend. We are awful sorry. Our ratings in congress have gone down faster then Divine Brown on Hugh Grant.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:58 pmComment by TripMaster Monkey — October 2, 2007 @ 2:46 pm
Rory/Jake/The Person Giving My Mother-In-Law A Run For The Money isn’t going to answer, because he can’t. He’ll come up with a lame-ass “It’s not my decision to make” or some such crap, just as he did when I asked, simply, how the MoveOn ad provided aid and comfort to the enemy, a very specific charge that he made yet is apparently unable to back up.
Tomorrow, Rory will be claiming that we all took his comments out of context.
October 2nd, 2007 at 2:59 pm“Rory” sez:
You are ‘mistaken’, “Rory”. I’m asking Jake….I’m also asking you, since you and he are one and the same.
I don’t really care what you want to call yourself, “Rory”, but I do expect you to have the integrity to answer my questions, without using the dispute about your true identity as a shield to evade discussion of the topic at hand.
One more time. I answered your questions. Answer mine.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:05 pm“Rory” sez:
Point to what’s false, “Rory”. Cite the exact passage that is false.
How does that determine the veracity of the facts presented in the ad? Explain yourself.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:07 pmRory, Rory, Rory. You are the reason the right is losing online. No game at all. Keep calling 70% of the country un-American and aiding the enemy and America-haters, blah blah, blah. You really think this crap works, huh? Keep it up then, I say. Drive the Republican Jalopy right off the cliff.
Later.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:07 pmYou don’t think an ad that falsely accuses the commanding General in Iraq (a majority of DEMOCRATS voted to condemn the ad), that the terrorists will use to inflate their importance across the Middle East (and recruiting numbers), at the same time deflating our own military recruitment is “aid and comfort?â€
rory
Demostrate how the MoveOn add is false. (and the fact that a majority of Dems voted to condemn the add does not constitute proof of falsness)
Demonstate how the add is deflating our military recruiment? That has been down since a majority of our country realized that the occupation in Iraq is a quagmire, and bush doesn’t care.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:10 pmAnswer the questions put to you, “Rory”.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:15 pm“Rory” sez:
First of all, why does that matter?
Second, the questions asked weren’t asked by just me.
Grow the hell up, “Rory”.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:23 pm“Rory” sez:
No, you haven’t.
Bobwurst said:
You have failed to answer this question.
Calling you on your pathetically transparent lie is not a “schoolyard taunt”, Jake, any more than calling General Petraeus on his pernicious lies is “giving aid and comfort to the enemy”.
If you don’t like it, Jake, either go back to your original nick, or make up another one (and try not to make it so blatantly obvious next time around).
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:41 pmFor those who haven’t the time I did look up Rush’s bio -
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:48 pmRe: College - failed all courses, mother said he couldn’t pass ballroom dancing.
Re: Marital - 3 x divorced
Re : 4F for Vietnam yes, pilonidal cyst however not confirmed as inoperable - painful but not life threatening. Cause could be over use of medication.
Re : Pompous attitude on drug users - should be jailed unless it is the doctor shopper Rush Limbaugh
Oh, one more thing, he comes from a family of attorneys with close Republican ties. So, discount anything that comes out of his brain disconnected mouth.
as soon as you stop your schoolyard taunts, I will answer your questions as well.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 3:26 pm
Now where have I heard that one before?
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:54 pmRory or whatever your name, find someone worthy to defend instead of pond scum like Rush or O’Reilly. Try Jack Murtha decorated and wounded, Jim Webb, or any of the mis-treated wounded at Walter Reed.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:54 pmAfter the “study” of problems at Walter Reed, Bush said, ” I have no immediate plans to change anything.”
Bush sure takes good care of those giving limbs and lives doesn’t he?
Rory or whatever, why not join up and find out first hand how Iraq is doing, I can give you names of soldiers willing to trade places with you right now.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
Excuse me? Falsely accusing? The “formula” for counting deaths was changed. That is a fact, not an accusation, that MoveOn pointed out. The death toll thus doesn’t look that bad after all, since you aren’t counting all the deaths. Shot in the forehead? Oh, that counts. Shot from behind? Ignore it. Blown up by a car bomb? Ignore it. An American soldier is shot in Iraq, taken out of the country for medical attention, and dies after he leaves Iraq. Oh, we won’t count that, either.
You never bothered answering why one type of death is important, but not the other.
The ad will cause lower recruitment numbers? Oh, that’s been happening long before the ad came out, due to the young people who have wised up and do not want to fight in a “war” being waged in a country that was of no threat to us. Besides, haven’t you heard? The Army lowered their recruiting goals so that they could report that they were meeting their goals. Sound familiar?
The “surge” had two goals; only one was met, and even that can be argued. Therefore, it did not succeed.
Say my boss gives me two goals to keep the company in business. One is to increase subscribers, the other is to increase revenues. Say I meet the second, but not the first. I cook the books on the number of subscribers by finding a way to keep them in the system as active customers but they don’t have to pay. The stockholders find out about my little plan. You think the stockholders are going to say, “Oh, that’s OK. You met one of the goals, so we are going to let you keep your job and we are not going to vote to sell the company to our competitor.” Yeah, right.
October 2nd, 2007 at 3:58 pmNot sure why you hate your mother-in-law so much though.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
Oh, I don’t hate her. I just hate the fact that she lies all the time and then refuses to take any responsibility for her actions.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:00 pmFunny how all the ones for more war have “other” priorities. Pretty tough sweating it out buying high price gas. When is the last time you volunteered at a VA hospital, helped a soldier write a letter home because they don’t have arms anymore? Or are blind or can’t put words together because of head trauma ?
If you are too cowardly to put a uniform on, try helping those wounded that are putting their lives back together. At the least buy a airline ticket to those getting out of the hospital and needing to go home. You war defenders make me sick.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:07 pmDRxJ:
Perhaps on an episode of “Super Nanny†(assuming your own mother never taught you good manners)
Comment by RoryJake — October 2, 2007 @ 4:01 pm
Does that mean I’m now off the Ignore List?
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:14 pmSweet!
Rory - read the transcript PRIOR to editing, Rush was calling ANYONE against Bush’s agenda phoney. But Rush is a paid talking head, anyone defending this bunch would have to be paid or un educated.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:21 pmI cannot yet “demonstrate†with 100% certainty that recruitment numbers are lower directly because of the ad.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
No, but you sure as hell will throw around accusations that it is. “I can’t prove it but I’m going to say it any way.” Real intelligent there, Rory.
Tell you what…let’s end all aid and comfort to the enemy right now.
We’ll have to…
1. Tell Congress to shut up and give Bush and the next President everything he or she asks for regarding funding the war. No debate, no questions asked.
2. Silence all war protesters, including those who go to Washington and march in front of the White House or the Capitol, those who debate the war online, those who debate the war on TV and radio, those who debate the war in newspaper articles, editorials, and letters to the editor. If it means threatening blogs such as RedState or Think Progress with hefty fines, if it means 24/7/365 monitoring by our government of these sites, if it means shutting them down, then so be it. The security of our nation and the success of our military in ridding the world of terrorists is at stake.
3. Silence all current and former members of the military from debating the war.
4. Monitor, with the help of the NSA, phone companies, the National Guard, Blackwater, and local police, the movements of all citizens and their conversations in all local places, including the street, restaurants, grocery stores, shopping malls, gas stations, sporting events, phone calls, e-mail, postal letters…any form of communication.
Did I leave anything out? Is this the kind of country you want to live in? Do you support eliminating all form of dissent that might aid the enemy and give them reason to cheer? What should be the penalty? If I say here today that I do not like the Bush administration and I am against the war, and a terrorist strikes New York again tomorrow, are you going to accuse me of giving comfort to that terrorist and lock me up?
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:22 pmAt home? You mean you’re not in the service? Why not? I mean cheney, he uhh..oh wait.. Ummm but then rush he..uhh..well there’s always that hero bush who served..ummmm.. All at home. All of them. Just. Like. YOU.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:23 pmWhat does your husband have to do with it? I’m asking YOU.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:30 pmI don’t have to read the transcript, because I heard the entire show LIVE. Rush was not calling everyone against Bush’s agenda phoney. I am also not paid to defend him, and I have a graduate degree. How about you?
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 4:24 pm
That’s true, he was calling everyone against the war agenda phony.
Nice deception from you - very GOP.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:34 pmBecause, I stay at home taking care of the kids, home, and him; as you noted above, I am not in the miltary service. We live in a community property state, however, so I “pay†more than my fair share of taxes as well.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
Ah, how long before the next episode of supernanny is filmed at your house, while you are busy posting on the ‘blogs’ while ignoring your household?
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:36 pmWe live in a community property state, however, so I “pay†more than my fair share of taxes as well.
Comment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 4:34 pm
If you don’t work, you don’t pay taxes… DUH…
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:36 pmComment by Rory — October 2, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
Yes, I was referring to those two goals, one of which has not been met (after being told many times by war supporters and others on the Right to “be patient” and “give it until September”).
Since one of the goals has not been met (and apparently has little chance of being met, as the administration itself is backing away from that expectation), how can you say the surge is a success?
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:37 pmWell, I’ve got to go finish mowing the yard. Will check back in later.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:38 pmRory - I too have a graduate degree and taught high school math for years. Now I volunteer at our VA hospital and try to help those who believed this administration’s lies. Talk with real soldiers, who have been there. Surely there is a hospital close by or go to a web site of Vets against the War. Listen to both sides and then decide who are the Phonies. Educate yourself to what America used to be and what we are under this administration. Accountability, honesty, loyalty, all words that have been erased by this insane path.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:42 pmRory - You obviously don’t agree so talk with actual soldiers in the hospital, listen to them, just take the time to help one of them. I bet you can find an hour or two a week in your day.
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:55 pmMargaret - Bush had so many goals that constantly changed how could anyone keep up. Now if anyone is listening we need to invade Iran not because they have wmd but because they are arming against our soldiers. The PR machine found America wasn’t going for the wmd idea again. So, even tho the Pentagon’s own survey found Iran IS NOT arming against our soldiers, Bush is pushing that new idea.
AND PEOPLE STILL BELIEVE THIS CRAZY MAN !
October 2nd, 2007 at 4:59 pmOnce again, libs hide behind a cripple. Couldn’t you find a veteran who hasn’t suffered brain damage to speak for your side, or is brain damage a requirement to say such things?
OK, we’ll give you another chance. Find a veteran who doesn’t fall under the “oh so coveted” victim status you require before picking a fight, then repeat your challenge.
Of course, Harkin is still hiding, foisting cripples on the world to fight his fights for him.
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:31 pm#172 - How about Jon Stoltz, or Jim Webb or Jack Murtha or John Kerry ? For that matter how about my son ? Did you even watch the Walter Reed hearings in the Spring ?
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:48 pmtexaslady,
NONE of those you named are willing to go on Rush’s show, are they? That’s what I thought.
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:58 pmIt sure would be nice if these young men had read the transcript or heard the whole exchange between Rush and the caller, then they would know that he was talking about the “Phony” solider. Last I heard you had to be in the army longer then 44 days to become an Army Ranger.
October 2nd, 2007 at 5:58 pmOnce again, libs hide behind a cripple. Couldn’t you find a veteran who hasn’t suffered brain damage to speak for your side, or is brain damage a requirement to say such things? Comment by Jason M. Hendler — October 2, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
You’re not a cripple, you’re just brain damaged - from the Aspergers. Ironic you would call others braindamaged though!!
OK, we’ll give you another chance. Find a veteran who doesn’t fall under the “oh so coveted†victim status you require before picking a fight, then repeat your challenge. Comment by Jason M. Hendler — October 2, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
You mean like the wounded guy that Fox News used to parade around who kept claiming everyone was spitting on him - even when the video tape evidence proved he was a liar? Is that the kind of ‘victim’ you were referring to? You’re a victim of hatred, brain damage and ignorance - that’s truly being a victim Jason! Oh, and your 2006 election prediction skills - those were funny!
Of course, Harkin is still hiding, foisting cripples on the world to fight his fights for him.
Comment by Jason M. Hendler — October 2, 2007 @ 5:31 pm
Cripples? You mean the handi-capable don’t you? Such mean spiteful words, from such a mean spiteful little man. You definitely found the political movement where you belong, just like the little man with the mustache did in the 30s! Loon!
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:01 pm# 179 actually Jon Stolz said this a.m. he would go on Rush’s show anytime. Of course Rush and Billo never allow dissenters to speak now do they? Again, wear the uniform before calling names. Gee Rush doesn’t qualify now does he?
October 2nd, 2007 at 6:31 pm“Rory” sez:
Actually, Shakey, you are. Remember, we busted you for posting another soldier’s bio as your own?
Run away from that all you like, but I’m not going to let you escape your lying past.
Ohhhhhh…”time-out”, huh? Is that what you’re calling running away now?
It must be truly horrible to be you, Jake. You have my pity.
BTW, you still haven’t answered Bobwurst’s question. I’ll post it again for your benefit:
Answer the question or admit your lie.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:07 pmJason Misogynist Hendler sez:
Sheesh. Jason refutes himself. He’s a real time-saver. ^_^
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:09 pm“Rory” sez:
That’s exactly what you did, Jake. Last time, your excuse for not answering my questions was that I ws on your “ignore list” (the reason for my membership in said list being an out-and-out lie, s I’ve demonstrated repeatedly). This time, your excuse for not answering my questions is because I’ve seen through your pathetic little charade, and refuse to give you the clean slate you so desperately want.
First of all, Shakey, Bobwurst asked you a direct question, which I’ve since quoted more than once. The word “questions” in your statement doesn’t belong in quotes. Are these the writing skills one learns in Stanford?
Second, Bobwurst did let you know…and you persisted in ducking the question. I’m going to hit you with this question every thread I see you on, Jake, until you either supply the requested information or admit your lie.
October 2nd, 2007 at 8:54 pmWow, that was good.
October 2nd, 2007 at 10:25 pm