October 2, 2007
Rush to Judgment
By Mary Lyon
Sounds like this is WAR, Rush. At the very least, you deserve to have it declared on you.
Evidently the last straw has finally arrived for many Americans who actually do have a shred of decency left in them about the war in Iraq - and about our troops who are marooned in that hell hole.
I've gotta hand it to Rush Limbaugh. Radio's answer to Jabba the Hutt has come up with a new and different way to slam people - specifically past and present members of our armed forces - who openly object to the war. They're "phony soldiers," whether they're a caller like "Mike from Chicago" or Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org or General Wesley Clark or General John Batiste or any members of the 82 nd Airborne who wrote that op/ed piece in the New York Times calling for a change in policy and direction in Iraq (two of whom have since been killed in combat).
Limbaugh says these have earned nonstop derision and condemnation because, despite their actually seeing combat close-up, and sticking their necks out while already in harm's way, they have the gall to speak out against the war. Now, they're not just unpatriotic, un-American, appeasers, Neville Chamberlains, Saddam-lovers, Osama-lovers, and traitors. They're "phony soldiers."
Funny enough, Limbaugh ought to know all about phony soldiers. He burns incense to that guy who pranced around the aircraft carrier in May, 2003, who shirked his Texas Air National Guard duty because strings could be pulled on his behalf from the highest quarters. And he worships that other fellow who got five deferments when he wasn't being busted for drunk driving, because he had "other priorities" than serving his country during the Vietnam era. Rush likes THOSE phony soldiers just fine. They talk tough and push a lot of war on a lot of innocent civilians and armed forces who thought they were doing some good for their country. They strut around in front of banks of servicemen and women so the cameras will record impressive, eye-catching scenes with camouflage and "chocolate chip" fabric patterns forming a stirring, patriotic backdrop.
On a more personal note, Limbaugh knows a good dodge when he sees it. Just check that noble backside of his. It talked loudly and eloquently enough at the draft board, once upon a time, to get him out of Vietnam , too. I suspect from how constipated he sounds on the air that those all-important, life-saving "anal cysts" might still be lurking down there somewhere.
I seem to remember, mere days ago, this fools' rush in the Senate to fall all over Texas war-lover John Cornyn's laceration of MoveOn.org's one-day newspaper ad. MoveOn.org's sin was to ask a simple question - whether General Petraeus's findings on the war would be honest and objective, or a betrayal of our trust in his haste to deliver what his commander-in-chief wanted to hear. Seventy-two Senators collapsed to their knees for this one.
(b) Sense of Senate.-It is the sense of the Senate-
(1) to reaffirm its support for all the men and women of the United States Armed Forces, including General David H. Petraeus, Commanding General, Multi-National Force-Iraq;
(2) to strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus and all the members of the United States Armed Forces; and
(3) to specifically repudiate the unwarranted personal attack on General Petraeus by the liberal activist group Moveon.org.
Interesting, don't you think, that Point 2 there? "To strongly condemn any effort to attack the honor and integrity of General Petraeus AND ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES."
Seems to me that would include "Mike from Chicago", Jon Soltz of VoteVets.org, General Wesley Clark, General John Batiste, those members of the 82 nd Airborne who wrote the op/ed war critique in the New York Times , and many, many more. Wouldn't it? How about a companion Senate resolution denouncing Limbaugh for this same sin, as well? Mr. Cornyn? Anyone?
I must admit, on a personal note, that I've viewed Limbaugh dimly for many years - way before this disgusting affront to human decency. I think my Rush revulsion started about the time I became aware that he was calling then-teenager Chelsea Clinton the "White House dog" on the air. I can remember being awfully sensitive about my less-than-enviable appearance when I was a teenager and his incessant, below-the-belt strikes against an innocent "non-combatant" turned my stomach. He did that strictly to insult. To hurt. To be just plain mean. To be an ass. And to stir up the soul-less low-life hyenas who hang on his every word and wish only that they'd thought up that hideously cruel jab, themselves. It appears Rush has learned little since the Clinton era except how to be more insulting, more hurtful, meaner, and a substantially greater ass.
Let me make one thing crystal clear: Those of us who oppose this war and want it stopped (SOONER than later), and want our troops brought home out of harm's way are the ONLY ones who REALLY support the troops.
You don't support the troops when you insist on feeding more of them into a bottomless meat grinder for dishonest, revolving-door reasons.
You don't support the troops when you're too cheap to send them upgraded Humvee armaments and improved body armor, when you let them run out of bullets, feed them meals prepared in unclean kitchens, and compel them to sift through local landfills to cobble together reinforcements of their own.
You don't support the troops when you leave them with so few resources they have to write to Mom and Dad to send them supplies in the next care package from home.
You don't support the troops when you won't give them a decent amount of time back home with their families between battle calls, and you leave them on duty for months longer than the recommended tours of duty require.
You don't support the troops when you nickel and dime them during wartime so the super-rich can enjoy further tax cuts.
You don't support the troops when you force them to work alongside shadowy, unaccountable mercenaries committing war crimes while making as much as ten times the salary, who then skip town so the military's left to take the blame.
You don't support the troops when you speak of cutting combat pay and family separation differentials.
You don't support the troops when you turn a blind eye to military hospitals where recovering veterans languish in filthy, moldy, vermin-infested rooms.
You don't support the troops when you send them into combat with deliberately low-balled numbers of comrades with whom to complete the task properly.
You don't support the troops when you lie to their grieving widows and mothers about why or how they died, and then give them the run-around when they seek answers.
You don't support the troops when you don't question their commander-in-chief's refusal to meet their flag-draped coffins returning to Dover Air Force Base, or to attend even ONE of their funerals.
You don't support the troops when you're okay with forbidding the media to cover either of those events, so that their fellow Americans can better understand and share their sacrifice.
You don't support the troops when you leave them alone in the war zone while telling everyone back home to live it up and go shopping, without a second thought for their sacrifice.
You don't support the troops when you slander the sacrifice of wounded veterans by making a vile "joke" out of The Purple Heart - and turning it into a spit-in-the-face "purple heart band aid."
You don't support the troops when you continue to lie about why you just HAD to send them into harm's way to begin with.
Can we get a "Sense of the Senate" resolution about THAT?
The following are links to actions that are proposed for responding to Rush Limbaugh's shamelessness:
Wespac community: http://securingamerica.com/ccn/
Armed Forces Radio Network - comments:
Media Matters for America: http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270010?f=h_top
I can't help but marvel at the hypocrisy behind Limbaugh's latest spew, and why those who so ardently screech for this dead-end war condemn all others (including present and former military personnel) who disagree. I can't help but notice the common thread that binds so many of the war excusers together. Curious, isn't it, how they're frequently the same bunch who chickened out of Vietnam but perhaps still feel the need to prove their John Wayne battlefield macho from the safety of their comfy arm chairs and their luxurious executive offices, which is why they're the Iraq fiasco's biggest pushers.
Now THAT'S a "phony soldier" for ya.
Then go DO something about it.