Limbaugh on his radio show referred to soldiers who speak out against the war in Iraq as "phony soldiers." O'Reilly was impressed with how civil the African-American customers were at Sylvia's Restaurant in Harlem. They didn't beat their wifes in public or scream obscenties, and they even used forks and knives. O'Reilly meant well. He was trying to dispell racial stereotypes, but it came out as patronizing and naive. Having served in Vietnam as a young Marine, I find Limbaugh's remarks more offensive. It galls me that anyone who has never served a day in our military should call anyone a 'phony soldier.'
2007-09-29 07:58:25 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I read the transcript of the Limbaugh exchange and was saddened that anyone who doesn't fall into lockstep with the pro-war yakkity-yaks is now deemed "phony". This isn't even a liberal/conservative issue anymore....MANY troops, both active and veteran, have come out to criticize the war in Iraq and how it's been conveyed to the American public.
I read the issue about O'Reilly's trip to Harlem. There, I'll cut him some slack, if just a little. He dined with Al Sharpton which is a feat in itself (not sure I'd even be patient or brave to do that) but he really could've stated his sentiments a little more sensibly.
And so the media organ grinders roll on and on.....
2007-09-29 08:20:37 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Well about Rush Limbaugh, I would've like to have heard to exchange before condemning or defending his remarks. He did go to Afganistan in support of the troops, so he can't be too bad and there are plenty of activist who claim military duty, but never served one day. And I know plenty of good Soldiers who left the Army when thier enlistments were overwith due to the fact that they didn't support the war or the deployments, but they did serve their country with pride and honor. Bill O'Reilly didn't take the time to think before he made those comments, they totally came out wrong it seems. To conclude, any time you do a live show, you will at some point insert your foot in your mouth, no matter how professional you are.
2007-09-29 15:08:44 · answer #2 · answered by darken40 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Limbaugh was specifically referencing Jesse Macbeth, the Fake Ranger the left held up as evidence of us Soldiers in Iraq Being War Criminals.
Getting your news from Media matters is like getting it from the walls of a Toilet.
But, hey, dont believe Me? listen for Yourself
2007-09-29 15:57:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, it does seem Rush Limbaugh really was misunderstood in regards to the "phony soldier" incident - he was referring to soldier impersonators and certain people either didn't realise this or tried to give his words a meaning that suited them. Y'know, sorta like what happened with John Kerry a little while ago.
O'Reilly... gee, here's a guy that signals staff to cut his guest's microphone when they start beating him in a debate. I don't think his comments were too bad... it was satire! But he's still an idiot. I don't know about foot in mouth disease, but I hear he has this big mole on his butt that prevented his conscription.
2007-09-29 15:17:30 · answer #4 · answered by Gotta have more explosions! 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
The emails must have gone out to the left-wing lemmings telling them to advance the recent Soros smear tactics against O'Reilly and Limbaugh.
Safe to say you were not listening to either program. If you were, you would know that these comments are taken completely out of context with the express purpose of conducting a smear campaign against two people the left wants silenced.
2007-09-29 15:06:59 · answer #5 · answered by Dee B 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Actually, the guy he called a "phony" soldier actually is a phony soldier. Jesse MacBeth served 59 days (boot camp) and was discharged before he completed it. He advertised himself as a fully Ranger qualified soldier who did service in Iraq and witnessed war crimes.
The O'Reilly story is equally distorted.
2007-09-29 15:04:00 · answer #6 · answered by Yak Rider 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Agreed, man. These guys are just entertainers and not all that in touch with reality.
Limbaugh should have avoided that subject for the reason you gave, but now he should probably apologize or at least clarify exactly what he was talking about.
As for O'Reilly, he has said a lot of dumb things just during the few times I listened to his show.
2007-09-29 15:10:28 · answer #7 · answered by Vick (Philadelphia Phreedom) 6 · 3⤊ 3⤋
They suffer from being chronic and habitual liars. With limited brainpower, they have perfected the art of insult as a form of 'argument'.
They are PERFECT for their audiences---a pair of foul-mouthed louts screaming at a mob of foul-mouthed louts.
It's a marriage made in heaven. Hate mongers feeding people eager to hate and unable to act like free men.
2007-09-29 15:46:15 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
No, but i wonder if Harry Ried does. "The war is lost." Apparently our soldiers and the American people don't exatcly believe that.
2007-09-29 15:46:16 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is actually too bad that Rush doesn't keep his foot firmly planted in his mouth, thus making him unable to mutter his tirades. Every time I think Bill O'Reilly is starting to really listen to other peoples' opinions, he curtly cuts someone off or makes a statement that they are just plain wrong. O'Reilly, I think really does care about some things and really looks at things studiously. Limbaugh is just a hate monger with an axe to grind and a platform from which to grind it.
2007-09-29 15:05:15 · answer #10 · answered by fangtaiyang 7 · 2⤊ 5⤋