Christopher Adamo at American Thinker believes it's a scandal concocted in response to the furor over the MoveOn "Betray Us" ad.
Congressional and Senate Democrats, along with the entire liberal political cabal, have been in a staged uproar ever since last week when Limbaugh made reference to Jesse McBeth and Scott Thomas Beauchamp who, adorning themselves with fraudulent credentials as members in good standing of the United States military, have been caught in blatant fraud, as they seek to make a case against the war.Rush Limbaugh's attackers have intentionally mischaracterized his criticism of such individuals as an assault the U.S. armed forces, asserting that he derided any troops who oppose the war as "phony soldiers."
In truth, he did no such thing, and his accusers know it. But why should they hesitate to lie about his words when they have gotten so much political mileage in the past few years by lying about virtually every other aspect of the terror war, the Republican Party, the military, and conservatism in general?
Against this murky backdrop, Democrats on Capitol Hill find an occasion in which they can wave their flags and laud their commitment to God, Country, and the troops, or at least those troops who concoct stories which discredit the terror war and the President's strategy to win it. Such people certainly deserve and receive the unbridled adoration and support of the Democrats.
Yep... it's a rare moment when Democrats can get any legitimacy as military supporters. But just so you know, I didn't support Congress posturing one way or another on the MoveOn ad. I figured let the free market do it's thing, and allow Congress to work on important things... like funding the troops? Right... I'm holding my breath.
The point here is... those that hate Rush will never accept the truth of the remark. And those that hate extreme liberals will never see the MoveOn ad as anything but a hate and anti-war campaign.
But since everyone want to compare MoveOn and Rush as a "both sides do it" action, let's examine a few striking differences....
Rush is like an ongoing soap opera - with interwoven conversations relating to other days. And like a soap opera, miss a day with Rush, and you may miss the gist of the plot. The previous day's "Morning Update" was on the phony soldiers who were brought to the public's eye as sympathetic heros. So those who lend an ear with any regularity knew what he was talking about.
But parsing words is an important piece of the ugly games the pols play. Truth be damned... it's better to push damaging headlines and innundate lies thru vast media outlets to score political points. It takes a while for the regular masses to figure out they've been duped. Ask Imus, ask Michael Savage, who's assault seems to escape the media's eye. And ask Rush... he'll be wasting time on this waste of time just to battle the political media machine.
And when we're talking about this crap, we're not talking about the really important crap!
So the parsed words are now infamous... "phony soldiers". Two words out of context in hours of Rush broadcast time. And those who do more than read Media Matters know Rush doesn't demean any soldier just because he disagrees with the Iraq war. It is, in short, a media driven lie.
By contrast the MoveOn ad has no defense, nor does the NY Times. The ad was placed, at a discount, *before* Gen. Petraeus opened his mouth. The content of the "betrayal" was based on lies... Petraeus was not a WH puppet. He did not "clear" his report with Bush. He spoke his own mind... as well as Crocker.
However Petraeus was condemned without even having a word to parse.
Which brings us back to the specific attack machines that also differentiate these two incidents. The attack machine to the MoveOn ad was bipartisan Congressional members, as well as the media. And their reaction was also bipartisan and stated in no uncertain terms by many. Okay, less strong from those who didn't want to risk losing MoveOn's cash for their campaign. But they did give a hint of disapproval so they didn't look like complete jerks.
The attack machine for Rush was Media Matters. And Media Matters is nothing more than MoveOn (Soros) and Hillary combined. Yes, the woman that make the phrase, "vast right wing conspiracy" famous helped to create and support a genuine attack dog as a "vast left wing conspiracy".
Media Matters is denying the connection with their every breath. But one must give weight to what comes out of the asses' mouth...
It has also now come to light that not only did Hillary Clinton help start Media Matters with former conservative David Brock in charge, she bragged about it to a convention of the far left. At the Daily Kos convention — a gathering of the far, far left — Hillary Clinton said the following:
"We are certainly better prepared and more focused on, you know, taking our arguments, and making them effective, and disseminating them widely... in a lot of the new progressive infrastructure, institutions that I helped to start and support like Media Matters and Center for American Progress."
She went on to explain that when she famously claimed there was a "vast right-wing conspiracy," she didn't realize it wasn't a conspiracy but just people on the Internet making political arguments out in the open. And she decided she could do the same thing.
In short, Media Matters was founded as a liberal attack dog... not mere internet political chat. Attacking conservatives is their prime purpose in existing. And that, folks, is the climate of political games we live in today. Disgusting, deliberate in their intent, and collaborated by a willing media to fill our lives with lies and BS.
I think I'll put on some music and head back to finish my half bath remodel...