IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New I thought that only
republicans did this?

And they are really stretching here..because the transcript makes it pretty clear what he was actually talking about. Still, it was an easy target and a good out of context quote for the dem machine to pounce on.

It seems like the count is equal on the power of Congress being used to "violate 1st Amendment rights" over the past couple of weeks.

And of course I'm a right wing whacko for pointing that out.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New It is dumb to play that game with the republicans
So I am not going to even talk about that resolution.

But, if you think the context of call was about the one soldier who was wasn't even mentioned till after Rush thanked the guy for calling, then you are being naive:

LIMBAUGH: I was not talking, as Contessa Brewer said here, about the anti-war movement generally. I was talking about one soldier with that "phony soldier" comment, Jesse MacBeth. They had exactly what I'm going to play for you. This is Michael J. Fox all over again. Media Matters had the transcript, but they selectively choose what they want to make their point. Here is -- it runs about 3 minutes and 13 seconds -- the entire transcript, in context, that led to this so-called controversy.

[begin audio clip]

LIMBAUGH: I -- it's not possible, intellectually, to follow these people.

CALLER 2: No, it's not, and what's really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media.

LIMBAUGH: The phony soldiers.

CALLER 2: The phony soldiers. If you talk to a real soldier, they are proud to serve. They want to be over in Iraq. They understand their sacrifice, and they're willing to sacrifice for their country.

LIMBAUGH: They joined to be in Iraq. They joined --

CALLER 2: A lot of them -- the new kids, yeah.

LIMBAUGH: Well, you --

[begin Limbaugh edit]

LIMBAUGH: -- know where you're going these days, the last four years, if you signed up. The odds are you're going there or Afghanistan or somewhere.

CALLER 2: Exactly, sir. And, and my other comment was -- and the reason I was calling for -- was to report to Jill about the fact that we didn't, didn't find any weapons of mass destruction. Actually, we have found weapons of mass destruction in chemical agents that [inaudible] been using against us for awhile now.

I've done two tours in Iraq. I just got back in June and there were many instances of -- since [inaudible] not know what they're using in their IEDs [improvised explosive devices]. They're using mustard artillery rounds. The VX artillery rounds in their IEDs.

Because they didn't know what they were using, they didn't do it right, and so it just kind of -- it, it didn't really hurt anybody but there are -- those munitions are over there, it's just -- it's a huge desert. If they've buried it somewhere, we're never gonna find it.

LIMBAUGH: Well, you know, that's a moot point for me right now --

MIKE: Rush --

LIMBAUGH: -- the weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We're, we're there. What -- who cares if, if -- we all know they were there and, and Mahmoud [Ahmadinejad, Iranian president] even admitted it in one of his speeches here about -- talkin' about Saddam using the poison mustard gas or whatever it is on his own people -- but that, that's moot, right? What, what's more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working.

And all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and, and your colleagues over there is, is a great threat to them.

[end Limbaugh edit]


LIMBAUGH: It's just, it's frustrating and maddening, and it is why they must be kept in the minority.

Look, I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much. I gotta -- let me see -- got something -- here is a "Morning Update" that we did recently talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. And they have their celebrities.

One of them was Jesse MacBeth. Now, he was a "corporal," I say in quotes -- 23 years old.

[reading from "Morning Update" (subscription required)]

What made Jesse MacBeth a hero to the anti-war crowd wasn't his Purple Heart. It wasn't his being affiliated with post traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, though. What made Jesse MacBeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage in their view off the battlefield.

Without regard to consequences, he told the world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq: American soldiers killing unarmed civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account translated into Arabic and spread widely across the internet, Army Ranger Jesse MacBeth describes the horrors this way:

'We would burn their bodies. We would hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque.'

Now, recently, Jesse MacBeth, a poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court, and you know what? He was sentenced to five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs' claim and his Army discharge record.

He was in the Army. Jesse MacBeth was in the Army, folks, briefly -- 44-days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse MacBeth isn't an Army Ranger. Never was. He isn't a corporal. Never was. He never won the Purple Heart and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen."

You probably haven't even heard about this, and if you have, you haven't heard much about it. This doesn't fit the narrative and the template of the drive-by media and the Democrat [sic] Party as to who a genuine war hero is.

Don't look for any retractions, by the way, not from the anti-war left, the anti-military drive-by media or the Arabic websites that spread Jesse MacBeth's lies about our troops, because the truth of the left is fiction, is what serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities 'cause they can't find any that fit the template of the way they see the U.S. military.

In other words, for the American anti-war left, the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth.

[end audio clip]

LIMBAUGH: That was the transcript from yesterday's program, talking about one phony soldier. The truth for the left is fiction that serves their purpose, which is exactly the way the website Media Matters generated this story. Fiction, out of context, did so knowingly.


He certainly seems to me to be saying that real soldiers knew what they were getting into and the phony soldiers didn't and that is why they are criticizing the war.

[link|http://mediamatters.org/items/200709280009|media matters] 
Seamus
New It appears to me
he was talking about a specific person who misrepresented himself greatly and was used, especially in the blogosphere, as a "just look at these atrocities" rally for the antiwar left.

I'm not sure if there have been other examples or if this is the same guy that was posting blogs that were false. He did, however, generalize from that specific and give these folks the ammo to say (in true sound bite fashion) that Rush only supports troops that support the war and anyone else is phony.

You can't debate this on merit, because Rush has been pretty consistent with Hannity and the others in being very supportive of the troops...but you CAN make a great sound bite out of it.

This quote.

"Look, I want to thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much. I gotta -- let me see -- got something -- here is a "Morning Update" that we did recently talking about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. And they have their celebrities.

One of them was Jesse MacBeth"

Again, I don't know of more than a couple of examples of folks caught in lies about what they witnessed...so the generalization was not wise.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New That is the way he operates
In the first part he is talking about phony soldiers, then uses one example to smear all the soldiers criticizing the war with the same brush.
Seamus
New Regular listener then?
I can only go by the transcript. I'm working when he's on...and that's music...not talk radio.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New Nope
Don't have to listen. Because he is as effective as he is, he is very well scrutinized and his patterns of attack are well publicized.
Seamus
New So he needs to be studied?
I'm sure he'd feel honored.

Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New Yes, of course he does.
So people can counter his lies, so they don't get spread as "fact" by uncritical mouthpieces like... Oh, I don't know, does any example come to mind?

I assure you there is neither an intention to honour him, nor any reason(*) to feel honoured by it.

Quite the opposite.





(*): Neither for him, and even less for the "talking-point"-spewing mouthpieces like... Oh, if only I could come up with some concrete example! But I'm sure you know what kind of people I mean.


   [link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]
New Another regular listener.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New Wrong on two counts. (Oh, look, that's all of them!)
BeeP rushes to defend that upstanding stalwart man of honour, Rush Limbaugh:
And they are really stretching here..because the transcript makes it pretty clear what he was actually talking about. Still, it was an easy target and a good out of context quote for the dem machine to pounce on.
Yes, the transcript of this, the second broadcast, makes it utterly clear that he is now trying to claim that the first broadcast was about "one man only". The actual transcript of the first broadcast, though... Funny, why aren't you quoting that? (I mean, that is the "context" you're accusing them of taking things out of.) Could it be because that proves Limbaugh -- and therefore BeeP, in so uncritically echoing him -- is being a tad economical with the actual fact-based truth? Read the transcripts and judge for yourselves:

[link|http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270010|Limbaugh: Service members who support U.S. withdrawal are "phony soldiers"] and [link|http://mediamatters.org/items/200709280009|Limbaugh selectively edited "phony soldiers" clip, claimed it was "the entire transcript"]. (And here's an earlier one, from August, where he applies the same smear to some guy called Paul Hacket: [link|http://mediamatters.org/items/200508040003|Limbaugh on Hackett: "a liberal Democrat" who served in Iraq "to pad the resum\ufffd"] -- and, while he's at it, gives Senators John Kerry and Max Cleland a stroke or two with the same brush. What, you thought the despicable SwiftBoaters had been debunked? Not in Rush's world! [And fuck knows about BeeP's.])

Hey, one more thing: He constantly talks about "the phony soldiers" -- note the plural-denoting 's'.

So, that's one count where you're wrong.


It seems like the count is equal on the power of Congress being used to "violate 1st Amendment rights" over the past couple of weeks.
Let's see... Is this letter signed by "We, the United States Senate, by the powers vested in us, do solemnly Declare ...", or whatever phraseology the Senate would use in an official resolution of censure? No, look -- it isn't! It's signed by just a bunch of people (who happen to be Senators), i.e, with no official imprimatur by (one half of) the legislative power of the United States of America whatsoever. There is a world of difference! But, oops, you must have "missed" that. I know, I know, that's such an easy thing to do.

But still, that's the second count where you're wrong. And since that was all there was to your post, you're wrong on all counts. (OK, "both" doesn't sound quite as bad. Use that, then, if you will.)


And of course I'm a right wing whacko for pointing that out.
Oh no, of course you're oh-so-impartially "just a general pessimist" about all politicians. It's sheer coincidence that everything you actually say about politics here, tends to support the Republicans. Sheer coincidence.

And, hey, if whatever it is that you're saying about politics (and just coincidentally in support of the Republicans) happens to be tinged more with Republican "truthiness" than actual fact-based truth... Well, that doesn't mean you're being a Republican mouthpiece either! Because it just doesn't, because you say so, and never mind those pesky facts!

(But, hey, you've been trying this gambit for a long time now, and it isn't any more wrong now than it's been all along... So I won't count that one against you here. Let's call it a "meta" point.)


   [link|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode|Christian R. Conrad]
(I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.)
Ah, the Germans: Masters of Convoluted Simplification. — [link|http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=1603|Jehovah]
New I equate the 2 acts
only can read what I see and I don't listen. I'm not defending rush beyond what I read from the unedited transcript on that days program.

YOU, on the other hand, have invented this as a defense of Rush. I don't listen to him, don't care about him and have no reason at all to defend him.

If you would care to actually read the posts made, you would see that this was started and is continuing as "why arean't we just as disgusted with >this< around here?"

To which you, apparently, a non US guy at that...appear to jump to rabid defense of the DEM position (Of COURSE its different, it wasn't an official vote...ignoring that it was on written by a Senator, on his letterhead and signed by 40 some-odd gov't officials)

In the meantime, they have the dem party machinery trying to have him removed from AFRTS. ACTUAL CENSORHSIP. But hey, only the repo's play by those rules. Keep on deluding yourself, pal.

So I read you, Rush is BAAAD, Moveon is GOOOD (this sounds like your point...but I'm the right wing whacko)

(PS..without that SHEER COINCIDENCE, you'd be left with Marlowe as a dissent. And Box once or twice. Not much point in discussing something if your all in lockstep, is there? Remember your rules of debate)
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New Sending a letter is kind of meaningless
especially when it is Rush they are talking about.

Whether you are defending him or not, for you so that it is obvious that they were stretching because he was talking about only one soldier and not trying to undercut all the soldiers who come out against the war is truly unbelievable. The message the right is delivering is that anybody and everybody who doesn't think there is any way to achieve the objectives of the war and that we are doing more harm than good over there is someone who wants America to lose. That comes through very clearly in the transcript.

I don't listen to Rush, but I can read.
Seamus
Expand Edited by Seamus Oct. 4, 2007, 09:56:24 AM EDT
New Regardless.
It appeared from what I read that he was dealing with the likes of the true fake...but I understand the broad brush thinking too. Its not really the point.

In fact, its more to my point if one thinks it was a slam against every soldier.

A vote of the kind done on moveon is also pretty meaningless. But it seems to get alot of people fired up around here.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New Re: Regardless.
IMO, anyone with any experience with Rush picks up on what he does and how he operates. And I don't see how the fact that Rush was talking out more than just the one soldier affects your point one way or the other.

Same with the dems. AFAICS, everyone on the right knows the dems don't have the stomach to consistently use the same tactics as the right does. Let alone with the same veracity. Using tactics like the letter is, not currently, a part of their main arsenal. It is not effective and that is why people ignore it. Its just not worth arguing about something that meaningless, especially when the other side ignores it. If it doesn't work and doesn't generate any attention, they may stop doing it.

The right, on the other hand, are very skilled at turning things like the moveon.org ad into their own sound bite. They did that by successfully re-framing the ad and making it a big deal. You had the same view point. The only thing I took exception to was the flawed logic you used to prove your point.

Seamus
New CENSORSHIP
In the meantime, they have the dem party machinery trying to have him removed from AFRTS. ACTUAL CENSORHSIP. But hey, only the repo's play by those rules. Keep on deluding yourself, pal.


<cough>

Well, now, if you want to define censorship that way...that opens all kinds of doors. Are you SURE that pulling Rush from AFRTS is CENSORSHIP? I mean it's my tax dollars that are putting him on the air. Is Rush ENTITLED to those dollars?
New Re: CENSORSHIP
oops
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
     Hrm. Wonder why this hasn't been posted yet - (bepatient) - (22)
         Guess we have better things to do -NT - (imqwerky)
         Why should it be? - (crazy) - (16)
             I thought that only - (bepatient) - (15)
                 It is dumb to play that game with the republicans - (Seamus) - (7)
                     It appears to me - (bepatient) - (6)
                         That is the way he operates - (Seamus) - (5)
                             Regular listener then? - (bepatient) - (4)
                                 Nope - (Seamus) - (3)
                                     So he needs to be studied? - (bepatient) - (2)
                                         Yes, of course he does. - (CRConrad) - (1)
                                             Another regular listener. -NT - (bepatient)
                 Wrong on two counts. (Oh, look, that's all of them!) - (CRConrad) - (6)
                     I equate the 2 acts - (bepatient) - (5)
                         Sending a letter is kind of meaningless - (Seamus) - (2)
                             Regardless. - (bepatient) - (1)
                                 Re: Regardless. - (Seamus)
                         CENSORSHIP - (Simon_Jester) - (1)
                             Re: CENSORSHIP - (bepatient)
         It is the Democrat response to the MoveOn ad - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
             Fair and Balanced - (bepatient)
         Probably cause - (Simon_Jester)
         But, since we're POSTing Rush... - (Simon_Jester)

Void where prohibited.
82 ms