Is this not yet another attempt from the radical left to eradicate free speech?
Remember they tried to take down Michael Savage a few months ago, now they're out to crucify Rush Limbaugh for simply calling out someone who lies about their service. Did the main stream media not condemn a young woman for lying about her fiance dying in the WTC? Why's it OK for THEM and not Limbaugh?
It's only "hate speech" when you don't agree with it, isn't it libs? Or is it that you just need someone to crucify for your own backfired "ad?" Who are you going to try to shut down next?
Seriously, we ALL know people from this VERY SITE that pretend to have been in combat, won military honor awards, or served several enlistments in lands far far away. Even I've received emails from some lunatic that claimed to be an FBI agent, prior service, war veteran with a "DD213" (ROFL) calling me a "chickenhawk."
What's so bad about calling these people out for the fakes that they are?
2007-10-02 10:56:51 · 11 answers · asked by Karma 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
It is more honorable to condemn these phonies and demand honesty in the media than it is to DEFEND these lying pieces of crap (liberals...see yourselves here) and make excuses for them.
There is NOTHING wrong in speaking out against phony soldiers.
2007-10-02 11:52:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
And the MoveOn.org ad was not free speech?
The Repubs can't have it both ways.
Rush comments started out about the guy who was faking to be a soldier but his triad expanded into calling several prominent Dems, who had indeed served in the military, and other real soldiers who simply didn't share the Repubs blind acceptance of GWs war as 'phony soldiers'. Rush himself never served in the military and yet he somehow finds himself qualified to judge who is a real versus a phony soldier? His ill planned comments were strictly political and if nothing else he owes an apology to the US armed forces.
2007-10-02 11:17:09 · answer #2 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
If we're going to take you seriously you need to get off the crack pipe and stop defending ignorance and jingoism that Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh are known for. Until then your rantings are nothing but jokes. If there are phony soldiers, yes they need to be outed but what does that have to do with the left. As far as Yahoo boards go, there are probably some people who are lying about being in the military, but we just don't know do we? You cannot prove if they are or if they are not. I believe some are veterans, but not all of them. Are you going to write off the ones that were veterans but disagree with you? Or, are you only going to believe those who happen to agree with your positions? Perhaps a little discretion and critical thinking on your part is needed to understand the difference between information and journalistic research AND that of jingoism, propaganda and lying for your own position that Michael Savage and Rush Limbaugh are well known for. They are not journalists and are not there to inform you. They are there to propagandize and promote one point of view in hopes that you will follow their simplistic message. I for one will never believe anything Rush or Savage says because they cannot be trusted with the truth. They are proven pathological liars.
2007-10-02 11:08:26 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 5⤋
Because they haven't seen a fellow man die in combat or held a real gun and shoot at enemy's they can't say that they have done something that is regrettably. if i say right now that i served military service( i didn't) then what makes me different from the courageous men in battle who had shed and seen much bloodshed.
2007-10-02 11:10:36 · answer #4 · answered by tigerboy1150 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Read the context of what Rush said...
He was speaking to a caller. The caller mentioned the soldiers that critics talk to who just so happen to oppose the war.
Rush then called those soldiers, "phony soldiers".
2007-10-02 11:00:35 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 5⤋
so then does Rush or maybe even you need a English tutor?
he says it was taken out of context but then why does he use soldier in plural? You guys want us to believe the conversation was about that guy who lied but then why does he use "soldiers"?
2007-10-02 11:00:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
It is only wrong if the phonies are Liberals!~!
2007-10-02 11:05:28 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
There was nothing wrong with what Rush said...the left just needs something to be hysterical about that they can bash the right with and Rush was handy ... tomorrow it'll be something else.
2007-10-02 11:00:46 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 6⤋
Nothing at all But be careful they hate being exposed and try to turn the argument in Bush bashing
2007-10-02 11:00:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 6⤋
Nothing, that's what the move on ad did, too.
2007-10-02 10:59:43 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 6⤋