Limbaugh is condemned for the "phony soldiers" line, but Senators who have equated our soldiers to terrorists

Question

Why is Rush criticized by the US Senate for his phony soldiers comment when we have US Senators (Murtha, Kerry, Turbin Durbin, etc.) calling our troops terrorists, comparing our troops to the gulags of the old soviet empire, and being called murders. And to top it off, MoveOn.Org calls a highly decorated veteran a Betray US.

Dems, do you think you are way overboard on this?

Beardog 4 - here are a few of John Kerry's quotes. You owe me $10 for each one:

Testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on April 23, 1971, Kerry claimed that U.S. soldiers had "raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blown up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Vietnam

Dec 5, 2005 interview with Bob Schiefer

And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the--of--the historical customs, religious customs. Whether you like it or not

Isn't he calling our troops terrorists?

"There was no firefight. There was no IED that killed these innocent people. Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood"
(John Murtha, May 19, 2006)

"... they [Marine] killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
(John Murtha, May 17, 2006 at news conference)

Isn't this calling our soldiers murders?

Answer 1

Typical lib posts above. they have to stoop down to calling names instead of debating an issue. Wha the dems in congress have said about the troops is far worse than what they perceived limbaugh to have said. I listened to the whole conversation, not a limbaugh fan either.

Answer 2

it somewhat is the way that Propaganda works. they attempt to physique public opinion by using utilising distinctive buzzwords to portray an identical photograph from distinctive perspectives. Bush's grandpa funded Hitler and his daddy ran the CIA. Bush knows all approximately the thank you to apply propaganda. The PKK has been attacking Turkish civilians in Turkey with American weapons that have been funnelled to them. Even the puppet government of Iraq considers the PKK to be a Revolutionary Organization 17 November.

Answer 3

Our soldiers have been sent to invade a country, they have been told to kill it's citizens, they had to kill it's leader and are now occupying this country who did nothing to us, all by the direct order of our commander in chief, Bush, the real terrorist. Our troops are doing their job, unfortunately Bush thinks he is "King of the World" and has sent them on a fool's errand. Petraeus is prolonging this reign of terror by telling Bush and Cons what they want to hear.

Telling facts about what soldiers do in battle or have done on raids during time of "war" does not mean you are calling them terrorists or murders. Are you saying our soldiers never did any of those things? In all wars or military actions things happen or are done to civilians that would not fly during normal times. Isn't that why you Cons are glad they're fighting over there and not here?

Answer 4

Not a Dem, but I think that certain conservatives (Ann Coulter, Rush, etc.) started this mess several years ago by questioning the patriotism and service of people like John McCain, Max Cleland, and John Kerry because they stood up to the Admin.

Do I think that the Dems are overboard on this? Yes, to an extent. Keep in mind that you reap what you sow.

Rush is getting his just rewards for being a loud-mouth jackass.

Answer 5

You're got it wrong.

There's a world of difference between criticizing a top official who is paid to take scrutiny on his policies and is schetically perceived as a tool of the Administration (General Petraeus) vs. criticizing a foot soldier or grunt as "phonies" and other mindless name calling. Petraeus is a big boy and he can take care of himself. On the other hand, it is low class to slam the grunt in the field when they can't always speak for themselves. However, in this case, one of the vets took it back to Rush and told him off. Good for him!

And if there's any direct quotes from any of these Congress members calling our troops "terrorists" or murderers, produce it. IMO it's doubtful, given that Rep. Murtha is a decorated veteran who regularly visits wounded soldiers at Walter Reed and actually stands up for the grunt. Calling for inquiries into policies and regulating troop behavior is NOT slamming them.

Answer 6

Did Rush mix up his Oxycontin/Viagra cocktail a little stronger? He's hallucinating again and thinking he is Joe McCarthy. We need to remind him where Joe McCarthy, big fat cat senator that he was, ended up. In psychiatric care.

I guess Abu Gharib and Gitmo don't exist in the perfect Neocon world do they? And maybe Betray Us should actually get on the front lines and be shot at instead of his office in some commandeered palace out of harms way.

Answer 7

First off, do you have any links to any of that?

Didn't think so.

Second, the bad website called the poor little general names? Awwwww. Maybe he should, as I heard sooooo often during my military service, "suck it up, buttercup."

See, it is strange to me that when a website runs an ad questioning the motives of a carreer desk jockey who is parroting the party line to curry favor with the current regime and is called on it, the questions about his motives are "attacking the troops." Because God knows that a private doing house to houses in Iraq at 4 in the morning feels the pain of the guy in the pentagon moving his unit around on a map like a chess piece.

Yet, when Rush Limbaugh, a man who has never served his country- in fact weaseled out of it when called upon- calls soldiers who do not believe his point of view "phony soldiers," to me, a DIRECT attack on a good portion of our troops- it is somehow okay.

And don't give me that "he was talking about that one guy" crap- he went on to name another soldier who is currently serving in Iraq who wrote something Rush didn't like.

Why do you guys defend that gasbag?

Answer 8

No, but I think you are. Show me one official floor record in which any Senator from either party referred to any one of our soldiers as a terrorist and I'll give you $10.

You can't do it, because it didn't happen. Nobody really thinks that Rush thinks the soldiers are all phony, he's just getting a little taste of the nonsense that he dishes out every day. What's wrong with that?

I notice a suspicious lack of anything that rhymes with "errorist", or "errorism" in any those quotes, my friend. Anything more relevant? With these ones, even out of context, you've still got to squint and turn your head to the side to imagine he's referring to our troops as terrorists.

Answer 9

You ask this THE DAY that Limbaugh compares a wounded Iraq vet to a suicide bomber?????????

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/2/143649/962

Answer 10

Apparently the cons have given up on the false claim of "Rush was taken out of context" and are now falling back on ridiculous, tired talking points of the past.