Friday, October 5, 2007

Phony Soldiers and Phony Democrats

Why have the democrats taken a seemingly innocuous remark by Rush Limbaugh and attempted to create a scandal from it? Because they need to divert attention from’s “General Betray us” debacle and Hillary’s ties to MediaMatters. The liberals have figured out that the ad was disgraceful and backfired on them. So they had to create the “phony soldier” hoax, accusing Rush of calling any soldier against the war a phony. In fact he called Jesse Macbeth, a kid that never even completed basic training but claimed to have committed numerous atrocities as an Army Ranger in Iraq, a phony soldier. A completely true statement. I would add wanna-be, loser, criminal, POS, among other things.

Of course it doesn’t matter to the Dems that the “phony soldier” scandal is itself a phony, don’t ever let facts get in the way of a good smear campaign. They need to make people forget the “Betray Us” ad, and Rush is a convenient target.

Now Elizabeth Edwards weighs in with some inane diatribe about Limbaugh being 4F (does anyone even remember what that means?), during the Vietnam War. Why do the democrats keep dredging up Vietnam? A war JFK and LBJ got us into in the first place. John Kerry was insane to use his four month tour in Vietnam as proof he was qualified to serve as president. “I’m John Kerry and I’m reporting for duty”, what a joke. Kerry still has not released all of his military records… the guy has more skeletons in his closet than Jeffrey Dahmer. But I digress.

Ms. Edwards makes the absurd observation that the same medical condition that kept Limbaugh out of the draft during Vietnam should also prevent him from sitting in a chair for hours during his radio show. She also deviously contends that the “phony soldier” hoax should cause advertisers to seriously consider pulling their funding dollars from the Rush Limbaugh show.

Motivation behind the hoax now becomes crystal clear. It serves a dual purpose; make it appear as if the Democratic Party actually cares about our troops (at least those against the war), and just as important, try to intimidate advertisers into pulling their ad dollars from Limbaugh’s show, a man who commands a daily audience of millions and is the biggest conservative voice on the airwaves of America. These are the components of the “Betray Us” distraction.

This is an ambitious endeavor at best. The democrats are generally not perceived as being supportive of our troops. Especially when democrats such as Jack Murtha accuse Marines of cold-blooded murder in Haditha, Harry Reid states that the war is lost, and in true “Winter Soldier” form, John Kerry accused American troops of terrorizing Iraqi citizens and of being too stupid to get better jobs. They would now have us believe by their phony indignation over this hoax that they are offended by criticism of US soldiers. So where was this indignation when the “Betray Us” ad originally appeared in the New York Times on September 10th?

On September 26th The House voted to condemn the ad by a vote of 341 to 79. In a frightening display of loyalties, Hillary was one of the 79 “nay” votes and Barack Obama didn’t even cast a vote. The two democratic front-runners thought it better to slander the American commander in Iraq (and thus all his troops), than to anger their supporters at Money talks, candidates listen, and in this case indignation doesn’t pay.

The Democratic Party’s obsession with silencing Limbaugh or at least limiting his influence has been going on for years. It always flairs up during election cycles, but Rush has become an institution and attempts at shutting him down only make him more popular. Besides, the democrats overestimate his influence. They simply cannot accept the fact that many people do not share their views and need to believe Limbaugh is poisoning voter’s minds. He’s their boogey-man, and democrats consider it their duty to protect the unsuspecting American public from this one man conservative juggernaut.

The “phony soldier” hoax is a transparent attempt by democrats to damage Limbaugh and deflect attention from their predominant supporter’s scandalous actions. The people pulling the strings in this party are not Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, but those representing MoveOn, the DailyKos and George Soros. This is a party for sale, a party devoid of ideas and unable to pass any meaningful legislation, whose leading candidates are loyal only to the highest bidder, and are terrified not of terrorists, but of offending their big donors. Bill is already taking reservations for the Lincoln bedroom, and Hillary is putting together a list of pardons. The rich get richer.

No comments: