The New Republic, phony soldiers, & genuine chutzpah
posted at 5:43 pm on October 2, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
File this under: How did this get past the editors? Oh, right, this is The New Republic we’re talking about, where editors don’t actually, you know, edit.
Is The New Republic dumb enough to weigh in on the Rush Limbaugh “phony soldiers” phony controversy? Why yes, yes it is. Eve Fairbanks, thankyouverymuch for inserting The New Republic and its unique history regarding phoniness into this story. You would have been wiser to do what your editor did a couple of weeks ago and just stay under your desk.
Fairbanks’ post over at TNR’s The Plank begins:
I can’t help but find it incredibly karmically satisfying that Rush Limbaugh is getting spoon-fed a little bit of the same bitter medicine Democrats swallowed when MoveOn dared to call someone wearing a military uniform less than honest.
“…karmically satisfying.” “…bitter medicine.” “…less than honest.” You know, when I read The New Republic, and I read those three phrases in The New Republic, Rush Limbaugh is not the first name that springs to mind. There are at least two that preceed him. One is Scott Thomas Beauchamp. The other is Franklin Foer. Both have been less than honest, one has already swallowed some bitter medicine and there is bitter medicine in store for the other, and it will be karmically satisfying when that medicine is administered.
We continue:
Now, what Rush did was worse — he called the many Iraq war veterans who consult with antiwar Democrats “phony troops”
Actually, no he didn’t. He called phony soldiers like Jesse MacBeth and a fabulist whom the editors at TNR know quite well “phony soldiers” because that’s what they are. The phony soldiers fall into three categories: Those who claim to serve but never did; those who claim personal knowledge of US atrocities that never happened and who turn out to have inflated their own service records, if they served at all; and those who use their own military service records either to smear the military themselves or to vouch for others who smear the military and turn out to be liars. TNR’s own Scott Thomas Beauchamp falls into the latter category. TNR’s Eve Fairbanks is not only evidently unaware of how dangerous it is for someone writing for TNR to weigh in on this subject — blowback, indeed — but she’s unaware and probably willfully so that the entire accusation against Rush is false to its roots.
Not that writing falsehoods evidently matters a great deal to anyone at The New Republic. How’s that final report on Beauchamp going, Mr. Foer?
The phony soldiers phenomenon, and its cousin the liberal soldier who puffs up his record to make himself seem more authoritative in matters of war and peace, has become pernicious. The entire Democrat party and its ideological allies are evidently swooning from it. Call it Winter Soldier Syndrome. Or call it Harkin’s Disease.
But back to The Plank’s mistaken dive into the Limbaugh affair.
From the above sentence, Fairbanks strings together a bit of cheerleading for Dingy Harry Reid, and then closes her original post with this.
In these difficult days we find our scraps of pleasure where we can.
Indeed we do. And, Ms. Fairbanks, you have just supplied quite a bit of pleasure to everyone who has been waiting for more than two months now for your magazine to deliver its final verdict on the Scott Thomas Beauchamp affair.
Update: Did you know that TNR’s Eve Fairbanks has her own entry in the Urban Dictionary. Until tonight, I didn’t. Here it is.
1. Fairbanksing
A gratuitous fabrication in a story when the truth would have served just fine.
“…gratuitous fabrication…” Well, that explains why she works at TNR.
Ironically, the narrative of veterans lobbying either for or against the Iraq war is a subject she has covered before. Just last week, as a matter of fact. Given the potential for such a story to backfire on TNR, you’d think they would be hesitant to touch this subject at all.
Each veterans’ group claims to represent the opinion not just of certain veterans but of “Iraq vets” as a whole class. This is partly a political tactic–who would listen to a group called “A Few Iraq Veterans for Freedom”?–but it also reflects the veterans’ sincere conviction that their stance reflects the only honest conclusion to be drawn from the Iraq experience. Some Iraq vets I talked to were even skeptical that their political opponents could actually be real veterans. “A lot of those people weren’t Iraq or Afghanistan vets,” said VoteVets member Andrew Horne of the men and women at the VFF rally. “I know they’re wearing the shirts, but I saw a lot of guys who were older than my Dad.”
Lefty vets questioning pro-war vets’ authenticity. Interesting.
(thanks to Chris R.)
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »
Anyone know when the last time Beauchamp talked to TNR?
bnelson44 on October 2, 2007 at 5:45 PM
This controversy is so obviously manufactured that I do believe within the week it will back fire like nothing they ever expected.
Kahuna on October 2, 2007 at 5:47 PM
What? Did I miss the memo? I didn’t know there was any problem?
Well, blow me over with a phony feather!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 5:51 PM
Apart from the obvious tactic they always use, there is another tactic, a bit wormier, that they are using and which has to be watched.
They are creating the “straw man” that Mr. Limbaugh was referring to anti-war soldiers as “phoney soldiers”. They will pound this big lie until it becames the accepted truth.
It is the same tactic they were using on immigration…they say the right is “anti-immigration”. It is always an anti-immigration mantra. They deliberately refuse the draw the distinction between legal and illegal immigration.
I guarantee you they will do the same here…deliberately refuse to acknowledge the existence of the actual phoney soldiers…unless there continues to be a loud defence of mr. Limbaugh.
Blaise on October 2, 2007 at 5:52 PM
Eve Fairbanks has her own special entry in the urban dictionary
Topsecretk9 on October 2, 2007 at 5:57 PM
bnelson44 on October 2, 2007 at 6:01 PM
After serving up Moveon to the GOP, the Dem’s are in for a mutiny if they do not get their condemnation of Rush passed. I don’t know which is worse, not getting enough votes to pass it or not putting the matter to a vote. It will be like the Grinch that stole Fitzmas all over again.
rw on October 2, 2007 at 6:04 PM
.
NAM – MYO – HO – REN – GE – KYO…oops!…Karma must be different for each of us.
.
For example, I find the demise of Air America, the rise of FNS, and the hilarious perky fall of Katy (Courage!) Couric to be “karmically satisfying”.
.
Not to mention the breathtakingly downward spiral of the NYT’s readership, the death of hip-hop and cd sales, the rise of GOP radio talk shows and the threat of Geraldo spitting. These are all wildly positive signs (imo) for a future for conservatism in America.
.
And the election is STILL over a year away!
.
Keith_Z on October 2, 2007 at 6:07 PM
Bryan – “and those who use their own military service records either to smear the military themselves or to vouch for others who smear the military and turn out to be liars”
Someone who did that would not logically be a phony soldier. They would be other things, but not that.
Hypothetically, if Audie Murphy were still alive and he were to “smear the military” or “vouch for others who smear the military and turn out to be liars”, he would not be a phony soldier.
“During Murphy’s 3 years active service as a combat soldier in World War II, Audie became one of the best fighting combat soldiers of this or any other century. What Audie accomplished during this period is most significant and probably will never be repeated by another soldier, given today’s high-tech type of warfare. The U.S. Army has always declared that there will never be another Audie Murphy.”
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 6:25 PM
Stepped in a bit there Harry.
Should have said “most Americans agree”, your standard tag
linelie.fogw on October 2, 2007 at 6:28 PM
I think that Rick Moran had great clarity of thinking on this.
LIMBAUGH IS STILL A GOOSE – by Rick Moran
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 6:31 PM
Rick Moran – “Thankfully, Rush rescued me by going even further on his show yesterday. Not only did he include Jesse Macbeth and Scott Beauchamp in his “phony soldier” meme, he also included Jack Murtha in that notorious group for the Congressman’s execrable comments condemning the Haditha Marines before the official report on the incident had even been released.
Why is Murtha’s military career – a career that all can agree was distinguished and honorable – at issue as a result of his statements about Haditha? How can you refer to Murtha as a “phony soldier” when those comments were made long after he left the military?
Call him a “phony politician” if you wish. But Murtha’s service was genuine. Would Limbaugh refer to virulent anti-war Senator Daniel Inouye as a “phony soldier” based on what the Senator has said about our involvement in Iraq? Inouye, a genuine war hero who fought for this country while Japanese Americans were languishing in detention camps, lost an arm in combat and was awarded the Medal of Honor.
But Limbaugh’s inclusion of Murtha in his little gang of “phony soldiers” is telling. If the talk show host was only talking about “phony soldiers” why include someone whose only sin appears to be opposition to the war in Iraq – an opposition that led the Congressman to jump the gun on the Pentagon and condemn Marines – some of them entirely innocent – for the Haditha incident?
Limbaugh’s explanation just doesn’t hold water. It is entirely plausible that the polarizing Mr. Limbaugh issued a blanket condemnation of military people who are opposed to the war rather than singling out individuals like Jesse Macbeth when he uttered the words “phony soldiers.””
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 6:38 PM
What is wrong with these people.? Is Michael Savage right… Is liberalism a mental disorder?
BadBrad on October 2, 2007 at 6:51 PM
three posts so far, MB4?
You link Rick Moran, then repost it in a subsequent post. I eagerly await you thoughtful analysis of Rick Moran in your next post.
rightside on October 2, 2007 at 6:52 PM
I eagerly await you thoughtful analysis of Rick Moran in your next post.
rightside on October 2, 2007 at 6:52 PM
Just don’t get to excited.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 6:54 PM
I got it the first time. I get it, you have an issue with Limbaugh.
This is what I like to call “Ann Coulter Syndrome”. It’s very similar to BDS. But it instead inflicts those condemning people on their own side. Why? It’s like Dobson talking about 3rd Party Candidates. A lot of people on the right are pious types that think they have to pick a part every little thing lest they be considered partisan (which is what they truly are) then just purely idealogical.
Kerry is a liar until he shows me his papers. Murtha is a liar who has to go to court and testify because of it. They are just as bad if not more so than ones claiming to be something they aren’t militarily. And going “gotcha” to Rush doesn’t make what he said anything remotely like what Murtha, Kerry, Durbin, and their Code Pink affiliates have said about military personnel.
So you’re saying that Rush really intended to demean people in the military? And these guys who get up on the Senate floor really give one iota, truly, about people demeaning the military? Is this what you’re trying to say? Go sell your snake oil somewhere else. When the left starts condemn those on the left for their atrocious comments, then I’ll spend an ounce of my time desecting and psycho-analyzing what people “really meant” on the right. The fact that you have to use Murtha as an “ah hah” moment is really lame. Yep! You really caught him with that one. You should be proud of yourselves.
Sultry Beauty on October 2, 2007 at 7:01 PM
In other words, we’re castrated/stoneless, powerless, helpless and deprived little nothings and have to deflect from that reality, hoping (praying even) for Nov. ‘08. Your euphoria ain’t on the way.
Entelechy on October 2, 2007 at 7:12 PM
To:
.
Monkey see, monkey do..
Yup..it’s me…. I’m back!… Been watching you all day…. and you’re doing about a… minus D, which is maybe, a little better than usual.
But now, you’ve clearly stepped into the same donkey cesspool as Harry Reid, et al….. trying to use other people’s blah, blah money making rhetoric, via, in this case, attention getting blogging.
Here’s what sinks you…from the 2nd to last paragraph:
I mean your self-inflicted, superiority attempts are not only par for your course, but mostly, amazingly amusing!
That’s why I watch you so closely….to get my daily laughs!
Do you realize, that because of you, I’m going to make millions off my book, titled: Napoleon’s 3rd Cousin…….?!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 5:02 PM (from the other post)
and.. Yup been tapping at you all day….etcetera, etcetera, etcetera, and so on and so forth.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 7:30 PM
Yup… buy stocks in popcorn fields…. It’s going to be a snoozer!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 7:34 PM
If any of you have a problem with what Rick Moran said, take it up with him. He said it, not me.
I however do happen to think he was right on target.
Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see.
- Schopenhauer
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 7:51 PM
The affaire de Beauchamp finished off any shred of credibility that TNR had, so this latest bit of idiocy is just a comedic bonus, I guess. Reminds me of back in the day, when I flew combat missions over Vietnam in my T-16 Skyhopper…
ReubenJCogburn on October 2, 2007 at 7:58 PM
Audie Murphy would never do that. And since you’re the one posting Rick Moran’s writings here, we’ll take up our problems with you. Or are you unable to defend his work?
Bryan on October 2, 2007 at 7:59 PM
I vote for, “The record is clear.”
I heard it “live”, and Rush was disparaging no-one but those “phony soldiers” who have lied about their military experiences to gain whatever it is that they want by opposing the War.
Jesse MacBeth was the example du jour.
Media Matters apparently went with the aphorism, “if you’re gonna lie, do it up big-time!”
Rush is a known Patriot who supports the troops, whatever their political inclinations. The unreasonable interpretation of this recorded exchange and the refusal to accept the obviously intended meaning is “not” pathetic. It is a calculated projection of ideological power. It is dangerous.
I expect the usual suspects to gradually and grudgingly retreat using passive-aggressive tactics to shield their failed attack. But there will be no deserved apology from the perpetrators, or the perpetuators (sic.) .
I’m listening to Chris Matthews slander Rush as I type this. Ugh!
Ask the troops. Whom do they trust?
Randy
williars on October 2, 2007 at 8:06 PM
Except you are forgetting that Audie Murphy would NEVER DO such a thing. A hypothetical is all you really have.
In fact, I’m quite certain that no good soldier would say the kinds of things about his peers as MacBeth and Beauchump. And I’m not about to let you get away with trying to equate either of them with him. They don’t merit that honor, and it’s insulting to him. Audie Murphy is a genuine American hero.
Have you actually READ “To Hell And Back”? Audie Murphy would do no such thing as you describe, because he was proud of what he did (and let me tell you, his stories are far more gruesome than Beauchump’s).
It’s like saying, “hypothetically, I’m a protozoa.” Hypothetically, but it ain’t true, never will be, and no way you’re going to find a real soldier condemn his peers. Most of them are more along the lines of Marcus Luttrell.
The fact that so many of the people serving in Iraq are true heroes is all the more reason to point out the chicken*#&#s who come up with phony stories like this. You can’t place the idiots at Abu Graib out of bounds just because they serve, and you can’t place liars out of bounds for criticism just because they serve, either. They’re still liars.
otcconan on October 2, 2007 at 8:18 PM
Oh, crap, Bryan, you posted while I was editing.
otcconan on October 2, 2007 at 8:21 PM
Audie Murphy would never do that. And since you’re the one posting Rick Moran’s writings here, we’ll take up our problems with you. Or are you unable to defend his work?
Bryan on October 2, 2007 at 7:59 PM
I don’t think that Audie Murphy would do that either – slander or support someone who was lying (unless he didn’t think that he was lying that is) – pretty unlikely anyway. That was never my point. My point was one of logic. BTW, I do think that it is very plausible that he would not be supporting this war, a substantial majority of Americans do not. We will never know for sure what, if anything, he would be saying now. If you want a real life example use medal of honor holder Inouye who is against this war.
Rick Moran’s article does not need my defending as it stands on it’s own and it would be most presumptuous and overreaching on my part to think that I could say what he said better than he himself said it, particularly as it said it so well himself.
Do not make the mistake of thinking that either Rick Moran, whom I hesitate to speak for, was defending Murtha. He wasn’t by any stretch and neither was I.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 8:51 PM
You hesitate to speak for Rick Moran, yet you feel free letting his words speak for you? Then, surely, you should feel free to defend sentiments you share.
otcconan on October 2, 2007 at 8:59 PM
Well you prove you are not a genius, because you cannot see. You prove you are not talented because you do not even see the target.
What the hell does Audi Murphy have to do with Rush or this discussion? Please explain that one.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:03 PM
In fact, I’m quite certain that no good soldier would say the kinds of things about his peers as MacBeth and Beauchump. And I’m not about to let you get away with trying to equate either of them with him. They don’t merit that honor, and it’s insulting to him. Audie Murphy is a genuine American hero.
I was in no way equating Audie Murphy with MacBeth and/or Beauchump. You have missed my whole point and are substituted something else.
Have you actually READ “To Hell And Back”? Audie Murphy would do no such thing as you describe, because he was proud of what he did (and let me tell you, his stories are far more gruesome than Beauchump’s).
I did read the book many years ago and saw the movie. I actually, as a kid, saw from a distance part of the movie being filmed. I may even have seen Audie Murphy, who played himself in the movie.
otcconan on October 2, 2007 at 8:18 PM
Did you even read what Rick Moran wrote?
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:05 PM
Just knock if off with the old vets argument. We don’t know whether Murphy would support the Iraq war, but we know very well that he wouldn’t pull a Kerry or a Beauchamp and smear the troops who are currently fighting in that war, as Kerry did in Vietnam and Beauchamp did of his brethren in Iraq.
Your arguments are pointless, trollish and make no sense. You quote Moran but then won’t defend him. You drag in a dead man to attempt a hypothetical that flies in the face of what we know about him (and being from Texas, I know quite a bit). You quote some other pointless quote just to make yourself feel superior. It’s tiresome. If I were Mark Levin, I’d say “Get off the phone!”
Bryan on October 2, 2007 at 9:08 PM
What the hell does Audi Murphy have to do with Rush or this discussion? Please explain that one.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:03 PM
Don’t miss the forest for the tress. Take Logic 101.
Read Rick Moran’s article. Read what he said and don’t read other things into it.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:08 PM
Are you suggesting Audi was a phoney soldier? He was not, his record is well documented. 1) he was there 2) he was very modest of his accomplishments (he did not make them up 3) he lived his life as man
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:09 PM
I am reading and quoting what you said, you do not know what you are talking about.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:10 PM
If Audi had made negative statements to the war people would have listend because he was REAL. Audi was not a PHONY, not in the war or in his civlian life.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:11 PM
The New Republic’s credibility left town a long time ago.
SoulGlo on October 2, 2007 at 9:13 PM
Yes, they had a phony soldier of their own. LOL
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:14 PM
Go get’em boy!
He (MB4) is an atheist, pacifist, Bush hating soldier who survived the Vietnam War, that had his valor stolen and is bitter that Americans didn’t appreciate his service when he came home.
And therefore it is easier to pound sense into your keyboard… and cheaper.
Calculate the cost my friend…calculate the cost… you will thank me for the warning.
Imagine a John McCain reincarnated as Kim Jong il who evolved into Frankenstein, The President of Iran….
That, my friend, is the picture I want you to have in your mind going into this.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:16 PM
Bryan on October 2, 2007 at 9:08 PM
*
You wrote – “and those who use their own military service records either to smear the military themselves or to vouch for others who smear the military and turn out to be liars” were phony soldiers.
*
I wrote – “Someone who did that would not logically be a phony soldier. They would be other things, but not that.”
*
There is no logical way around the truth of what I said. There just isn’t and no amount of reading other things into what I said will change that.
*
I was a soldier and if I were to smear the troops, which I would not do, I would not somehow become a phony soldier. It would not somehow rewite what has already happened.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:21 PM
I do not know if you are correct on your assesment of mb4 or not. I do know there are vietnam war vets who were spit on and degraded just like todays troops, wow what a negative sensation that had to be.
I am not a war vet, but I served 1971 to 1975, I do know many war vets who love this nation despite the far left fantasy land.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:24 PM
Opps forgot to quote you.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:26 PM
After hours and hours of (ATTEMPTED) debating I’m not lying in my assessment. The facts speak for themselves, along with MB4 being so transparent.
TRUST ME!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:30 PM
MB4
I have often wonderd-please enlighten me and the rest of us, what is it like to live in a fantasy land? A land were reality and truth have no meaning? Do you feel safe there or does it give you fear? How does it feel to make a fool of yourself without knowing you do? I am very curious!
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:31 PM
Mcguyver,
Actually I do trust your judgment, but I cannot accept it as fact until I see the facts. thats all.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:33 PM
He (MB4) is an atheist, pacifist, Bush hating soldier who survived the Vietnam War, that had his valor stolen and is bitter that Americans didn’t appreciate his service when he came home.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:16 PM
lol. lol. lol.
My dear fellow, you shall keep watch in the street. I’ll do the detective part.
- Holmes
*
Mcguyver, for the sake of yourself and any dependents, do not give up your day job to become a detective or psychoanalyst as you and they would starve to death.
I am an a atheist.
I am by no means a pacifist.
I am not a Bush hating soldier. I do not hate Bush and I am a very ex soldier. 1968-1972.
I did not have my valor stolen.
I am not bitter about 1968-1972.
So you got one right, the rest wrong. Again do not give up your day job!!!
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:34 PM
MB4
I have often wonderd-please enlighten me and the rest of us, what is it like to live in a fantasy land? A land were reality and truth have no meaning? Do you feel safe there or does it give you fear? How does it feel to make a fool of yourself without knowing you do? I am very curious!
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:31 PM
You are so silly.
lol.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:36 PM
To allrsn,
For example.. here is a headline;
…………..MISSION ACCOMPLISHED
Yet he claims the majority do not support the Iraq war… With NO explanation why Joe Lieberman, a war hawk, won in a landslide – in the liberal kook State of Connecticut – as an Independent.
The stolen valor syndrome is real, real enough for an act of congress in 2005
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:37 PM
MB4
so what? you still do not know what this discussion is, you still to not accept the reality of the situation, you are still talking in a fantasy! Would you wipe the egg off your face please? It doesn’t look good.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:37 PM
TRUST ME!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:30 PM
You know the Japanese in WWII said the same thing before a Banzai charge…
How did that work out?
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:41 PM
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:34 PM said:
So why are you so afraid to stick up for the soldiers/Iraq war/Iraqi people/Joseph Lieberman voters.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:41 PM
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:34 PM said:
.
So why are you so quick to denigrate Bush/war hawks/factual debates/war supporters?
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:44 PM
MB4
so what? you still do not know what this discussion is, you still to not accept the reality of the situation, you are still talking in a fantasy! Would you wipe the egg off your face please? It doesn’t look good.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:37 PM
Your argumentum ad hominem words have no substance. You sound like someones ex mother-in-law.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:45 PM
Mcguyver,
I scanned,…………..MISSION ACCOMPLISHED.
I am in agreement with you, I would like to add: It is my firm belief that we would have had this thing licked 3 years ago except for the dm left.
This is why, I love scanning newspapers this happened as reported in two papers one was the NYT: 1) The tempory presidentof Iraq sorry I have a computer problem I will get back if i can, I wil try to finish fast.
stated that our troops could start leaving in 6 months 2) two days later our man read went to visit soros 3) 2 days later Murtha did his infamos
‘pull out not speech’ have to leave now
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:47 PM
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:34 PM said:
You are a certified lier here because ALL Vietnam Vets had their valor stolen….
Every Vietnam war vet I and you have ever met have visible emotional scars and you are chief among them.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:47 PM
So why are you so quick to denigrate Bush/war hawks/factual debates/war supporters?
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:44 PM
I “denigrate” the fantasy of building anything like a democratic, rule-of-law, human rights nation in Sunni/Shiite Islamic Iraq. I “denigrate” the Iraqi-centric viepwoint. It is not rational.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:49 PM
You are a certified lier here because ALL Vietnam Vets had their valor stolen….
That is absolute nonsense. I have known hundreds of RVN vets and none of then had their valor stolen.
Every Vietnam war vet I and you have ever met have visible emotional scars and you are chief among them.
That is false and a slander.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:47 PM
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:52 PM
.
.
Consider this:
.
.
Where’s MB4 hiding?
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:53 PM
Ahh, all I had to do was exit I guess. I could not fix typo as my puter started overtyping for some reason. If you know how poor a typist I am you understand why I cannot use over-type. lol
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:53 PM
How so?
No Vietnam vet was appreciated when they came home.
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:54 PM
That is false and a slander.
No that is not false, that is fact!
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:55 PM
I, like most people, do have some “emotional scars”, but none are from my time in the Army nor from RVN.
This idea of the poor scared Vietnam vet is a slander and a myth. Sure there are some, but you did not say some.
You are sounding worse than John Kerry.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:56 PM
All the more reason why my fair warning is perfect timing…
…………..BEAT YOUR HEAD AGAINST KEYBOARD!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:56 PM
you must not have been born yet if you do not SEE that TARGET.
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:56 PM
…………..BEAT YOUR HEAD AGAINST KEYBOARD!
LMAO
You think I have never done so?
lol
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:58 PM
I, like most people, do have some “emotional scars”, but none are from my time in the Army nor from RVN, but from REAR VIEW NEUROSIS.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 9:56 PM
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 9:58 PM
and its not always my typing or the computer that does it. Somtimes it is trying to teach a lefty: 2+2=4 and 2×2=4, they cannot unterstand how both formali give the same answer!
I find that so fustrating. I have to read Ann Coulters book “how to speak to a leftie, if you must”.
lol
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 10:00 PM
No Vietnam vet services needed to get them of the street because they were disenfranchised, disillusioned and walking around in a stupor?
You have proved that it was worse, FAR WORSE, than I ever imagined!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:02 PM
No that is not false, that is fact!
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 9:55 PM
The claim that “Every Vietnam war vet I and you have ever met have visible emotional scars and you are chief among them.” is Bravo Sierra. You are also sounding worse than John Kerry.
Actually, I have to go to dinner at my local shelter for poor scared RVN vets now and meet up with ALL the other poor scared RVN vets, so I will be back later.
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 10:02 PM
because they were disenfranchised, disillusioned and walking around in a stupor?
And so many of them, god it was and still is so sad. And the left wants to do it all over again!!!!
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 10:04 PM
Such a book does not exist…….for MB4, et al.
I…. McGuyver …is as close a book there is……:)
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:04 PM
GOOD RIDDENCE AND THANKS FOR YOUR SERVICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Of course in their fantasy of reality, that never happened, and hell if it did they were just slimey dispicable people anyway.
sarc/off
allrsn on October 2, 2007 at 10:05 PM
IT TAKES ONE TO KNOW ONE!!!
—————————–>Back at’ya…
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:09 PM
I’LL BE GONE FOR A LITTLE WHILE TO TAKE A SHOWER!
………[ccccccchhhhhhhhhh]………………
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:11 PM
Right before I go to dinner at my local shelter for poor scared RVN vets and meet up with ALL the other poor scared RVN vets I will leave you with some reading material. Read it and you might learn something, just maybe.
Vietnam
myths
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 10:12 PM
More spin… from none other than MB4…. but nooooo of course you do NOT standby someone else’s article..
……so again, you, look superior to the rest of us….
..well good for you………
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:30 PM
2+2=4 and 2×2=4, MB4 does cannot understand how both formulas give the same answer!
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:32 PM
I need some eye cleanser – all I can register is “MB4.”
I’ll say this, anyone who attacks Limbaugh due to a claim of disrespect for our troops is an Allahdamned idiot. Rush’s consistent support of the military for two decades has been reminiscent of the love and attention Bob Hope took to the troops.
Lastly, I think Rush and Harkin ought to have a single shot pay-per-view duel to settle this, with the proceeds for USO.
T J Green on October 2, 2007 at 10:39 PM
Have any facts emerged yet?
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:46 PM
bnelson44 on October 2, 2007 at 11:00 PM
another thread hijacked by a clueless troll who uses this blog as a free alternative to therapy: MB4 rides again: he dithers, logic withers
Janos Hunyadi on October 2, 2007 at 11:17 PM
Late to the party, but I want to include my point of view for the record.
I was also listening to Rush when he said what he said: it was clear to me then, it is clear to me now.
Phony soldiers are ‘pretend’ soldiers. I’ve met a few. They pretend to be something they are not.
So the leftist zealots do what they do best, they get it backwards. They try to say that Rush was saying that soldiers who are against the war are ‘phony soldiers’.
How does the logic go?
“All humans are mammals”. The zealots then run around saying “Rush said mammals are human!”.
rockhauler on October 2, 2007 at 11:55 PM
I am a Vets for Freedom member and I was in attendance at the DC rally.
The group is not restricted to Iraq, or even GWOT vets, but is comprised of any vet who agrees with our pro-victory platform. We have Vietnam Vets and Cold War Vets in our membership. I can think of no good reason to restrict membership.
That said. What I want to know most is why all the discussion and energy is being spent on Limbaugh’s comments, or anything else that is of equal inconsequence.
The issue of the moment should be, why is the DoD presently operating under only a continuing resolution? Why hasn’t the Senate dispensed with all other distractions (like discussing Limbaugh) and passed a freeking appropriations bill? At the moment the Army, the Marines, the National Guard, the VA,… the entire DoD, has no money.
Time for the children of the Senate to end recess and quit wasting our time and money on stupid crap. Time to get some work done.
RTO Trainer on October 3, 2007 at 12:20 AM
Phony journalists meet phony Congresspeople.
Shouldn’t they vanish in a cheesy flash of anti-matter?
profitsbeard on October 3, 2007 at 1:17 AM
Because it is the intent of the democrats to obstruct, sabotage, and prevent victory.
rockhauler on October 3, 2007 at 1:25 AM
Vietnam
myths
MB4 on October 2, 2007 at 10:12 PM
More spin… from none other than MB4…. but nooooo of course you do NOT standby someone else’s article..
……so again, you, look superior to the rest of us….
..well good for you………
Mcguyver on October 2, 2007 at 10:30 PM
*
Well you make that easy. Too easy. No fun.
Now if you would just complete some of your reading assignments, you might catch up some and it would be more interesting – for both of us!
Again:
Vietnam
myths
“Burkett graduated from Vanderbilt University before he toured Vietnam with the 199th Light Infantry Brigade from 1968-69. When he returned, he moved to Dallas where he has been a stockbroker for the last 35 years. He was also an adjunct professor at UD for three semesters.
After serving in the military from 1966-1969, Burkett went to graduate school in Tennessee and then moved to Dallas.”
MB4 on October 3, 2007 at 1:45 AM
I know you are using this blog as a free alternative to therapy hence the reason why you don’t care to make sense or use facts in debate.
So therefore I’m not going to give you the satisfaction of therapy anymore.
Mcguyver on October 3, 2007 at 9:48 AM
I think Rick Moran is interpreting Rush incorrectly, anyway.
Rush wasn’t calling Murtha a phony soldier, he was questioning the standards by which he (Rush) is being judged.
Rush:
It isn’t that Jack Murtha is a phony soldier, it’s that Murtha was allowed to smear Marines horribly and yet nobody is trying to censure Murtha on the floors of Congress.
MayBee on October 3, 2007 at 10:31 AM
Okay, some comments from the cheap seats…
Rick is a big boy and is capable of owning what he wrote. I disagree with him, and I think he’s getting a little defensive, but his view is a valid interpretation of the events. He simply lacks my perspective on Rush because he doesn’t listen to him.
A phony soldier is not someone who smears the military. It is someone who 1) pretends to be a soldier or 2) who lies about the military. In the first case they are a pretend (phony) soldier. In the second, they are a soldier who makes stuff up (phony). It doesn’t take any leaps of faith or intuition to understand that the phrase “phony soldier” applies equally to two different types of people. It does not apply to actual soldiers who disagree with a war or war policy, nor does it apply to actual soldiers who are wrong or who show a stunning lack of solidarity with their brothers and sisters like Jack Murtha did. He is a back-stabbing rat bastard, but a genuine one.
As far as MB4’s damaged emotional state, I think that is his business. I’m not inclined to force victim status on people based on classification. If he refuses to embrace victim status, that’s a plus as far as I’m concerned.
Immolate on October 3, 2007 at 10:35 AM
I’m pretty sure they’re not answering the phone over there. At least when certain numbers show up on Caller ID.
saint kansas on October 3, 2007 at 11:59 AM
Well at least this blog got MB4 to admit he has some problems: a good first step.
landlines on October 3, 2007 at 2:20 PM
Well at least this blog got MB4 to admit he has some problems: a good first step.
landlines on October 3, 2007 at 2:20 PM
lol.
My main “problem” is all the stalkers, one in particular – he knows who he is!!! – that I seem to have picked up here.
Out in the World, and maybe here, mostly other peoples problems.
MB4 on October 3, 2007 at 4:04 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 Next »