by Christopher Adamo New Media Alliance
Once again, liberals have wandered into the unfamiliar waters of patriotism, righteous indignation, and pontification offered in "support of the troops." And once again, their moral and philosophical bankruptcy, their intellectual dishonesty, and their overarching hysterics reveal far more about themselves than about their intended target, in this case radio giant Rush Limbaugh.
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.
Limbaugh’s attackers have intentionally mischaracterized his criticism of such individuals as a blanket assault on the U.S. armed forces, asserting that he derided any troops who oppose the war as "phony soldiers."
He did no such thing, and his accusers know it. But why should they hesitate to lie about his words when they have gotten so much political mileage in the past few years by lying about virtually every other aspect of the terror war, the Republican Party, the military, and conservatism in general?
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D.-NV) achieved a nauseating level of sanctimony in his desperate effort to prove that Democrats "care about the troops" (at least those who fabricate excuses for America’s surrender) while attacking Limbaugh and talk radio. Look to Democrats to invoke this latest manufactured firestorm as damming proof of the need to resurrect the "Fairness Doctrine."
Reid knows full well that he is lying, and that his principled opposition knows that he is lying. But that is not his target audience. It is with Middle America, whose citizens he considers stupid and gullible, that Reid hopes to make his case.
But Reid tipped his hand by asserting that Republicans ought to climb aboard the bandwagon of imaginary outrage. Any time liberals begin plugging the bipartisan thing they are really seeking cover and validation from cowardly GOP members.
Furthermore, the shamelessness and brazenness of Reid’s lies stand as proof that he and his political supporters understand and accept such fraud as an inherent and viable component of the liberal-Democrat playbook.
It is hardly a news flash that the fake anguish expressed by Democrats over this contrived controversy is merely a continuation of the full-throated lies being proliferated by the Moveon.org/Democrat Party/Old media spin machine. The facts of this situation are as available as they are inarguable. They are also inconvenient to the left. So to keep their story going, Democrat mouthpieces will simply continue to ignore them.
When the truth is revealed, as it eventually will be, no liberal retractions or apologies will be forthcoming. The liberal political apparatus will simply proceed to its next target to be smeared, knowing full well that it will never be held accountable for this, or any other deception.
More than merely an attempt by Democrats to rebuild their tattered image after last week’s disgraceful treatment of General David Petraeus, their real intention is to continually build and expand a façade of perceived wrongdoing on the part of Rush Limbaugh. It is very telling that, as a purveyor of information, he poses such a raw threat to future Democrat political prospects.
Having failed miserably in every attempt to factually refute him, they now hope to eradicate his enormous influence through the "death by a thousand cuts."
In truth, Limbaugh was very specific as to which "phony soldiers" he was referring. For Jesse McBeth, the moniker clearly fits. He was drubbed out of the military during boot camp (after only forty four days to be precise), but then went on to claim membership in the special forces and under such false credentials delivered a plethora of fabricated stories, deriding the military and the mission.
Likewise Beauchamp, who did in fact serve overseas but whose compilation of similarly fabricated fables of abuse and atrocity, while buttressing his anti-war, anti-American worldview, have been thoroughly refuted by the rest of his outfit.
Limbaugh never even went so far as to include among the phonies Senator and former presidential wannabe John Kerry (D.-MA), whose entire "tour of duty" in Vietnam exceeded McBeth’s enlistment by only two and a half months. And that brief Southeast Asian visit netted him three Purple Hearts under highly dubious circumstances.
Of course if Kerry’s version of the affair is correct, he could permanently put the matter to rest while completely discrediting his critics simply by releasing his military records, which to date he steadfastly refuses to do.
Against this murky backdrop, Democrats on Capitol Hill find an occasion in which they can wave their flags and laud their commitment to God, Country, and the troops, or at least those troops who concoct stories discrediting the terror war and the President’s strategy to win it. Such people predictably receive the unbridled adoration and support of the Democrats.
But perhaps the most telling aspect of this latest offensive is the liberal characterization of Limbaugh, on several occasions just this past week, as "unpatriotic." This is quite the accusation coming from people who insist that the most heinous crime any conservative can commit is to "question the patriotism" of America’s leftists.
In contrast to real America, the "patriotism" of the left includes cheering for America’s mortal Islamist enemies, assuring them of their ultimate victory, downplaying or ignoring America’s successes, proliferating every false account of American atrocities against the enemy on the battlefield or in the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, and undermining the entire premise of the terror war from its inception.
It seems liberals presume to now hold complete dominion over who can be called "unpatriotic," and who should remain permanently immune to the charge, despite any seditious words or behavior. Admittedly, they have arrived at this position of power with little resistance, their ploy of redefining "patriotism" having received far too much assistance from timid Republicans and conservatives who acquiesced to their premise.
Their arrogance having been thus compounded, it should surprise no one that the likes of Democrat Senators Reid, Obama, Durbin, along with House Democrats Pelosi and Murtha, to name just a few, will expend every effort to undermine the terror war and endanger America for purely political reasons while asserting their "patriotism."
So abominable is their current stance that it is worthwhile to ponder, were it to fully degenerate to the point of crossing that barrier which defines open treason and blatant support of the Islamists, how their words and pronouncements would be any different from what they are today.
Yet we are supposed to believe that the real danger to the future of the nation is posed by Limbaugh’s severe, but thoroughly appropriate characterizations of McBeth and Beauchamp as "phony."
Christopher G. Adamo is a freelance writer and staff writer for the New Media Alliance (www.thenma.org). He lives in southeastern Wyoming. He has been active in local and state politics for many years. His contact information and archives can be found at www.chrisadamo.com
04 October 2007
by Christopher Adamo New Media Alliance