More evidence that the Left holds some values above truthfulness.
The Left is deceitfully trying to pin military defamation charges on Rush Limbaugh, knowing that the main media will be their organ despite their total breach of integrity.
Phony Soldiers, Phony Outrage, and Phony Patriotism http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/phony_soldiers_phony_outrage_a.html
“Congressional and Senate Democrats, along with the entire liberal political cabal, have been in a staged uproar ever since last week when Limbaugh made reference to Jesse McBeth and Scott Thomas Beauchamp who, adorning themselves with fraudulent credentials as members in good standing of the United States military, have been caught in blatant fraud, as they seek to make a case against the war.Rush Limbaugh’s attackers have intentionally mischaracterized his criticism of such individuals as an assault the U.S. armed forces, asserting that he derided any troops who oppose the war as “phony soldiers.”"
———————————————————————————————
MY QUESTIONS SENT TO CLARK:
General Wesley Clark, prove to me that the right more than the left has dishonored American troops and their leaders in the last three months as he asserted on Tucker Carlson on Oct 2. How does General Clark explain why leftist talk radio has no major success and no high caliber hosts and why he wants a totalitarian “Fairness Doctrine” system to control what is said about the military (won’t this punish the military-hating, ROTC-preventing universities)? How does General Clark compare Rush Limbaugh’s denunciation of the deceiving three month soldier planted by the left (Jesse Macbeth, who was sentenced to five months in prison for falsifying his military record) with Hillary Clinton telling General Petraeus in the national hearing that his testimony on Iraq was false? How does General Clark defend Tom Harkin’s careless, libelous and overly personal slander about Limbaugh, spoken on the Senate floor; Harkin who is a known liar about supposed heroics in his military pilot career. How does General Clark defend Harry Reid’s false and slanderous accusations towards Limbaugh on the Senate floor, accusing Rush of not being a patriot despite his own statements that America has already been defeated in Iraq? How does General Clark defend MoveOn.org which portrayed General Petraeus as a traitor in the far left NYT (who charged them only half of the normal fee)? How does General Clark defend the invective-laden attacks on Conservatives only, by the Soros-funded Media Matters (which Hillary Clinton claims to have helped form)?
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?print=yes&id=22702
————————————————————————————–
“There is no one more injured by phony war crimes charges lodged by phony veterans than veterans themselves whose service is dishonored by the slander. I know. In 1971, in addition to listening to John Kerry from our unit falsely compare our forces in Viet Nam to “the Army of Jhengiz Khan,” I heard Al Hubbard, the president of Kerry’s VVAW, appearing with Kerry in forums such as Meet the Press and Congress confess to war crimes such as bombing innocent villages. Hubbard was an Air Force pilot, who appeared on national television wearing the Distinguished Flying Cross and many other medals while confessing our guilt in Viet Nam. Except he was none of these things, having left the Air Force as a Sergeant, never serving in Viet Nam at all.”
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/10/02/fairness-doctrine-watch-the-crush-rush-democrats-agenda/
——————————————————————————-
“When the truth is revealed, as it eventually will be, no liberal retractions or apologies will be forthcoming. The liberal political apparatus will simply move on to its next target to be smeared, knowing full well that it will never be held accountable for this, or any other deception.”
“Well, as soon as the words were out of Limbaugh’s mouth, Hillary sicked her network on Limbaugh. The George Soros-funded, Hillary-devoted group Media Matters has been the tip of the spear, charging Limbaugh with unpatriotic slander against the troops. Because, after all, accusing phony soldiers of being phony soldiers is the same as accusing our troops in the field in Iraq of being phony soldiers. The whole thing is trumped up nonsense, of course, which is why the spectacle of the Senate Majority Leader denouncing Limbaugh from the floor of the Senate went over so poorly with the few Americans who still actually pay attention to Congress.”
http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/TomDeLay/2007/10/03/the_return_of_thatll_teach_em_hillary
————————————————————————————
“Apparently, the General wants Limbaugh’s show dropped from being broadcast over Armed Forces Radio and Rush dropped into a live volcano. That last part may not be an accurate transcription of the conversation as things got heated between Tucker and our soldier-scholar.
Granted, the Reagan and Truman Doctrines had more substance to them, but this, one must admit, has interesting possibilities.
If the good General wants no taxpayer money used by people (I assume not just Rush) to “assault the character of the men and women who serve in the armed forces”, then one must presume we may apply this doctrine to American academia, our valued public institutions of higher learning.
If citizens employed in our public colleges — and compensated with public dollars for their work — are discovered to have “assaulted the character” of our military, may tax money be pulled from them as well?
No fooling?
Hmm, I’m liking this doctrine General. You get Rush, we get to empty out about 40% of the faculty lounges across the country.
It’s a deal.
Heck, Rush might even go for it too.”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/10/the_clark_doctrine.html
