What’s the easiest way to smear someone like Rush Limbaugh? Lie and misrepresent. Take his words out of context. Don’t give anyone the context. And they just might believe you. (Especially if you do this lie and misrepresent thing over and over.)
The facts: On September 26, Rush Limbaugh made a comment about “phony soldiers,” in reference to people who lie about their military service. The transcript:
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.
The conversation continues with a discussion of people who sign up for the military and expect to be sent off to war, and mention of Democrats who want us to pull out. Rush then goes on to talk about a recent discussion of “fake soldiers,” Jesse Macbeth in particular, and it’s clear from the transcript that he’s saying this in reference to the earlier comment on “phony soldiers.”
Now, go back to the beginning of the part I quoted. The caller said “…they never talk to real soldiers.” Rush responded with “phony soldiers” to the this comment about “real soldiers.” There is no indication at all that he was making a comment about soldiers in Iraq.
The distortion: MediaMatters says that Rush was talking about real soldiers with this headline:
Limbaugh: Service members who support U.S. withdrawal are “phony soldiers”
They want you to believe that when Rush mentioned those (lefties) who sign up for the military after his “phony soldiers” comment, that’s who he was referring to. That doesn’t appear to be the case at all. But why let facts and common sense get in the way?
And MediaMatters isn’t the only left-wing voice screaming this lie. The media is all over it.
Rush repeats and clarifies on his show on September 28 (bold added by me):
I want to illustrate something for you today, folks. I’ve done it before. I want to do it again. I call this the anatomy of a smear, and what this is is a great illustration of the liberals and the Democrat Party playbook for ’08, which is underway now. The morning update on Wednesday dealt with a soldier, a fake, phony soldier by the name of Jesse MacBeth who never served in Iraq; he was never an Army Ranger. He was drummed out of the military in 44 days. He had his day in court; he never got the Purple Heart as he claimed, and he described all these war atrocities. He became a hero to the anti-war left. They love phony soldiers, and they prop ’em up. When it is demonstrated that they have been lying about things, then they just forget about it. There’s no retraction; there’s no apology; there’s no, “Uh-oh, sorry.” After doing that morning update on Wednesday, I got a phone call yesterday from somebody, we were talking about the troops, and this gentleman said something which you’ll hear here in just a second, prompting me to reply “yeah, the phony soldiers.”
And a video of Rush’s entire response to the controversy, including the part quoted above:
The fakeness of Jesse Macbeth is confirmed here, by the Seattle Post-Intelligencer:
Iraq war ‘veteran,’ hero lied about it all
Man pleads guilty in court to fraudBy COLIN McDONALD
P-I REPORTERHe wasn’t an Army Ranger. He didn’t earn a Purple Heart. He didn’t witness war crimes in Iraq.
The truth about Jesse Macbeth? He’s a fraud, and he’s now facing prison.
Macbeth, 23, pleaded guilty in a Seattle federal courtroom Thursday to making false statements to the Department of Veterans Affairs and altering his discharge papers.
Kicked out of boot camp after 44 days, Macbeth instead portrayed himself as a decorated soldier who served in both Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom, and was discharged due to post-traumatic stress disorder.
“To me it’s the same thing as theft,” said George Berthiaume, a local spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars. “It just irritating. It takes away from those who served honorably and were wounded — it’s stealing from people.”
For several years beginning in 2003, Macbeth became a star of the anti-war movement by claiming he saw and participated in war crimes in Iraq.
He gave interviews to news reporters and was popular in blogs and the alternative media. In a video that was widely distributed on the Internet, a frail Macbeth dressed in camouflage told of killing hundreds of civilians. “We would burn their bodies … hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque,” he said.
As part of the plea agreement, Macbeth admitted he had been lying. Anti-war Web sites have pulled his video.
Macbeth never got farther than boot camp at Fort Benning, Ga. He was discharged for his “entry-level performance and conduct prior to completion of basic training,” according to court documents.
At sentencing in September, he faces up to five years in prison. He will remain in custody until then.
Before entering his plea, Macbeth told Magistrate Judge James Donohue he had been treated for mental illness before entering his plea. His attorney, Jay Stansell, said Macbeth, however, was fit to plead guilty.
“It boosts our morale every time they catch someone,” Berthiaume said. “It’s probably not doing much for him, though.”
So it’s clear that Rush Limbaugh was accurate in his characterization of Macbeth as “phony soldier,” right? So why isn’t the left making that clear?
Even the U.S. Attorney’s office in the Western District of Washington agrees that there is such a thing as a phony soldier:
“The ‘phony war hero phenomenon’ plagues the American landscape and tarnishes the service of thousands of veterans who have served honorably. It strangles VA resources from providing critical care and benefits to deserving veterans returning from war,” said Douglas J. Carver, Special Agent in Charge of the VA Office of Inspector General, Western Field Office. “It all boils downs to this: these phonies submit claims to the VA for compensation and medical benefits they are not entitled to, and it takes away valuable resources from those who are entitled.”
So why isn’t the left retracting their statements about Rush Limbaugh? Why do they continue to mischaracterize what he said?
The answer is simple: These people want to smear Limbaugh so badly, that they will do so at any cost. They will not let facts and the truth get in the way.
Note: Michelle Malkin provides a ton of information on these fake soldiers.
You really have to be kidding. I respect your financial work because you provide reasonable objective facts to support your assertions, but this is out of line. Completely out of line.
Here’s some objective fact checking (with supporting documentation) by Media Matters which shows that Limbaugh is trying to revise history (which you’re now supporting):
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710020011?f=h_top
And after being criticized by a VoteVets.org member for his comments, he then proceeded to compare that serviceman’s speaking out to a suicide bomber:
http://mediamatters.org/items/200710020014?f=h_top
You should stick to what you know instead of being the RNC’s water carrier on Rush Limbaugh.
You should be ashamed of yourself for supporting someone who attacks our servicemen.
Nick – I’m sorry you’re not able to understand the truth. I’m sorry that you can’t understand that Rush referred to people who fake their military records as “phony soldiers.” I’m sorry that you don’t understand why Jesse Macbeth is just one example of what a phony soldier truly is. I’m sorry that you don’t understand that MediaMatters isn’t objective in any way, shape, or form.
Okay, enough of your revisionist history. He was talking about soldiers who come home and criticize the war. He did talk about Macbeth almost two minutes later with a separate caller and when he was on a different topic. To assert that he was talking about Macbeth in the following is a red herring argument which is patently false.
Here’s the full transcript:
LIMBAUGH: Another Mike, this one in Olympia, Washington. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER 2: Hi Rush, thanks for taking my call.
LIMBAUGH: You bet.
CALLER 2: I have a retort to Mike in Chicago, because I am a serving American military, in the Army. I’ve been serving for 14 years, very proudly.
LIMBAUGH: Thank you, sir.
CALLER 2: And, you know, I’m one of the few that joined the Army to serve my country, I’m proud to say, not for the money or anything like that. What I would like to retort to is that, if we pull — what these people don’t understand is if we pull out of Iraq right now, which is about impossible because of all the stuff that’s over there, it’d take us at least a year to pull everything back out of Iraq, then Iraq itself would collapse, and we’d have to go right back over there within a year or so. And —
LIMBAUGH: There’s a lot more than that that they don’t understand. They can’t even — if — the next guy that calls here, I’m gonna ask him: Why should we pull — what is the imperative for pulling out? What’s in it for the United States to pull out? They can’t — I don’t think they have an answer for that other than, “Well, we just gotta bring the troops home.”
CALLER 2: Yeah, and, you know what —
LIMBAUGH: “Save the — keep the troops safe” or whatever. 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 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.
You should print a retraction out of respect for those that serve.
Thank you, Nick. This transcript again proves that you and your buddies are mischaracterizing what was said. Your transcript shows:
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.
This clearly references “soldiers” with fake services records who were touted by the media as heroes.
Thanks again for helping me clarify.
“There is no indication at all that he was making a comment about soldiers in Iraq.”
Can you really say that given the full transcript in which they’re directly talking about Iraq and soldiers that come home and criticize it?
Also, Macbeth can’t represent multiple “soldiers.” Also, he didn’t talk about him in this conversation, so again, trying to link the two subjects is a patently false argument.
Oh, and here’s the other Mike that called in to criticize Rush about the war in Iraq.
Add it all up, he’s calling soldiers that come home and criticize the war are phony soldiers.
LIMBAUGH: Mike in Chicago, welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER 1: Hi Rush, how you doing today?
LIMBAUGH: I’m fine sir, thank you.
CALLER 1: Good. Why is it that you always just accuse the Democrats of being against the war and suggest that there are absolutely no Republicans that could possibly be against the war?
LIMBAUGH: Well, who are these Republicans? I can think of Chuck Hagel, and I can think of Gordon Smith, two Republican senators, but they don’t want to lose the war like the Democrats do. I can’t think of — who are the Republicans in the anti-war movement?
CALLER 1: I’m just — I’m not talking about the senators. I’m talking about the general public — like you accuse the public of all the Democrats of being, you know, wanting to lose, but —
LIMBAUGH: Oh, come on! Here we go again. I uttered a truth, and you can’t handle it, so you gotta call here and change the subject. How come I’m not also hitting Republicans? I don’t know a single Republican or conservative, Mike, who wants to pull out of Iraq in defeat. The Democrats have made the last four years about that specifically.
CALLER 1: Well, I am a Republican, and I’ve listened to you for a long time, and you’re right on a lot of things, but I do believe that we should pull out of Iraq. I don’t think it’s winnable. And I’m not a Democrat, but I just — sometimes you’ve got to cut the losses.
LIMBAUGH: Well, you — you —
CALLER 1: I mean, sometimes you really gotta know when you’re wrong.
LIMBAUGH: Well, yeah, you do. I’m not wrong on this. The worst thing that can happen is losing this, flying out of there, waving the white flag. Do you have —
CALLER 1: Oh, I’m not saying that. I’m not saying anything like that, but, you know —
LIMBAUGH: Well, of course you are.
CALLER 1: No, I’m not.
LIMBAUGH: Bill, the truth is — the truth is the truth, Mike.
CALLER 1: We did what we were supposed to do, OK. We got rid of Saddam Hussein. We got rid of a lot of the terrorists. Let them run their country —
LIMBAUGH: Oh, good lord! Good lord.
[…]
CALLER 1: How long is it gonna — how long do you think we’re going to have to be there for them to take care of that?
LIMBAUGH: Mike —
CALLER 1: How long — you know — what is it?
LIMBAUGH: Mike —
CALLER 1: What is it?
LIMBAUGH: Mike, you can’t possibly be a Republican.
CALLER 1: I am.
LIMBAUGH: You are — you are —
CALLER 1: I am definitely a Republican.
LIMBAUGH: You can’t be a Republican. You are —
CALLER 1: Oh, I am definitely a Republican.
LIMBAUGH: You are tarnishing the reputation, ’cause you sound just like a Democrat.
CALLER 1: No, but —
LIMBAUGH: The answer to your question —
CALLER 1: — seriously, how long do we have to stay there —
LIMBAUGH: As long as it takes!
CALLER 1: — to win it? How long?
LIMBAUGH: As long as it takes! It is very serious.
CALLER 1: And that is what?
LIMBAUGH: This is the United States of America at war with Islamofascists. We stay as long — just like your job. You do everything you have to do, whatever it takes to get it done, if you take it seriously.
CALLER 1: So then you say we need to stay there forever —
LIMBAUGH: I — it won’t —
CALLER 1: — because that’s what it’ll take.
LIMBAUGH: No, Bill, or Mike — I’m sorry. I’m confusing you with the guy from Texas.
CALLER 1: See, I — I’ve used to be military, OK? And I am a Republican.
LIMBAUGH: Yeah. Yeah.
CALLER 1: And I do live [inaudible] but —
LIMBAUGH: Right. Right. Right, I know.
CALLER 1: — you know, really — I want you to be saying how long it’s gonna take.
LIMBAUGH: And I, by the way, used to walk on the moon!
CALLER 1: How long do we have to stay there?
LIMBAUGH: You’re not listening to what I say. You can’t possibly be a Republican. I’m answering every question. That’s not what you want to hear, so it’s not even penetrating your little wall of armor you’ve got built up.
Certainly you understand that Macbeth was used as one example of the phony soldiers Rush was referring to?
I understand the concept of the left’s smear. Keep repeating false information over and over, and someone will eventually believe it. Well I’m not someone. It’s clear what Rush meant, and your twisting of it doesn’t change that.
I’m posting exactly what he said. I have not said one false statement.
And clearly Macbeth was not used as an example either in the first or second conversation.
There’s no logical way you can link his “phony soldiers” comment his second conversation to the points he later raises about Macbeth and “fake soldiers.” They’re independent and it is clear by reading the full transcripts.
Nick – Your second transcript doesn’t even reference the phony soldier issue at all.
Nice try Nick. I’m not buying your “phony” logic. It’s sad that you can’t connect the dots on this one.
The second transcript clearly shows that the two conversations were talking about the criticism of the war in Iraq. Which goes counter to your assertion of “There is no indication at all that he was making a comment about soldiers in Iraq.”
Breakdown where my logic is “phony” as I did with yours.
I spoke the full truth, you strung together unrelated conversations in order to provide cover to someone who criticized soldiers.
Oh, and here’s the guy you’re trying to defend talking about a soldier who was injured by a suicide bomber:
LIMBAUGH: VoteVets.org has — they describe themselves as an organization comprised of veterans of the Iraq and Afghanistan campaigns who oppose current policy in Iraq. They’ve put together a TV ad that takes aim at me. This ad’s going to run on Fox News, on CNN, it’s going to run on WMAL radio in Washington, $60,000 ad buy that’s going to run, I think, on our local West Palm Beach station down here. And there’s a man identified as Brian McCoff — McGough — it’s M-C-G-O-U-G-H, I’m not sure how he pronounces it, McGo, McGuff — I haven’t watched the ad.
He discusses his service in Iraq, the wounds he suffered there, and he says to me in this ad, “Until you have the guts to call me a ‘phony soldier’ to my face, stop telling lies about my service.” You know, this is such a blatant use of a valiant combat veteran, lying to him about what I said, then strapping those lies to his belt, sending him out via the media in a TV ad to walk into as many people as he can walk into.
This man will always be a hero to this country with everyone. Whoever pumped him full of these lies about what I said and embarrassed him with this ad has betrayed him. They’re not hurting me, they’re betraying this soldier. Now, unless he actually believes what he’s saying, in which case it’s just so unfortunate and sad when the truth of what I said is right out there to be learned.
Nick, your logic is phony because there is no logic to what you’re saying. You’re trying to draw a connection between Rush’s use of “phony soldiers” and this idea of soldiers who oppose the war when there is NO SUCH CONNECTION. Because that’s not what he said.
As for your last comment, Rush is correct to point out that this man has been lied to about what Rush said. What a shame that the organization would use a war hero to promote an agenda of lies.
That’s funny (sad), because in an interview last night, that very same soldier said he listened to the audio and went through Rush’s transcript and came up with the same logicial conclusion that I and objective people did…Rush was calling soldiers who cricize the war “phony.” (Countdown on MSNBC, 10/03/07)
What a shame that he can’t understand Rush’s comments either.
Seems Mccain can’t understand either:
Any American who risks his or her life to defend us has earned the respect and gratitude of every American citizen, irrespective of their views on this war. If Mr. Limbaugh made the remark he is reported to have made, it reflects very poorly on him and not the objects of his offensive comment. I expect most Americans, whatever their political views, will have the same reaction. He would be well advised to retract it and apologize.
Ah, so he didn’t hear it or read the context either, so he doesn’t know that Rush was referring to the non-soldiers who have faked their service records. We should inform him!
[…] Coenen presents Smearing Rush Limbaugh posted at […]