Dems unite to slam Limbaugh, GOP silent

September 28, 2007

As a rule, Democrats and their allies are a little slow when it comes to organized outrage. A high-profile Republican will say or do something that most decent Americans would find outrageous, progressive blogs will call him or her on it, and maybe we’ll see a press release or two from someone on the Hill. The media yawns, the Republican in question shrugs it off, and the political world keeps on spinning.

But yesterday was unusual, in a very good way. Media Matters reported on Rush Limbaugh smearing U.S. troops who support a withdrawal policy in Iraq, calling them “phony soldiers.” The unusual aspect of what transpired was watching the left act swiftly and efficiently.

VoteVets.org’s Jon Soltz, an Iraq vet, went first: “[I]n what universe is a guy who never served even close to being qualified to judge those who have worn the uniform? Rush Limbaugh has never worn a uniform in his life — not even one at Mickey D’s — and somehow he’s got the moral standing to pass judgment on the men and women who risked their lives for this nation, and his right to blather smears on the airwaves? … Get the point here, Rush? You weren’t just flat out wrong, you offended a majority of those of us who actually had the courage to go to Iraq and serve, while you sat back in your nice studio, coming up with crap like this.”

Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), a decorated war hero, soon followed: “This disgusting attack from Rush Limbaugh, cheerleader for the Chicken Hawk wing of the far right, is an insult to American troops…. He is an embarrassment to his Party, and I expect the Republicans who flock to his microphone will now condemn this indefensible statement.”

Within an hour, DCCC Chairman Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) issued a statement: “Rush Limbaugh’s personal attack on our men and women in uniform is reprehensible. It minimizes the sacrifice our troops in Iraq and their families are making and has no place in the public discourse. Rush Limbaugh owes our military and their families an apology for his hurtful comments that minimize their service to our country.”

Then the DNC, followed by Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-Pa.), another Iraq vet. Then Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), and Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), a Vietnam vet.

Honestly, I can’t remember the last time the Democratic Message Machine was this swift. In fact, I can’t remember the last time I thought the Democrats had a Message Machine.

Now, at this point, as delighted as I am to see the Dems respond this quickly and forcefully, the traditional media is doing what the traditional media always does: ignoring progressive complaints about a conservative smearing U.S. troops. According to searches on Lexis-Nexis and Google News, the only MSM outlets to pick up on this story were MSNBC (Keith Olbermann mentioned the story on the air last night) and the Chicago Tribune’s blog (not the paper’s print edition). That’s it.

But that’s not to say that the story won’t get picked up at all. When Bill O’Reilly was shocked to find civility in Harlem, it took a few days, but traditional news outlets eventually noticed the story and gave it quite a bit of play. There’s no reason Limbaugh’s smear won’t follow a similar media trajectory.

It’s just going to take a little effort. I think Faiz has the right idea: keep the pressure on Limbaugh’s GOP allies.

On September 20, 72 Senators voted for the highly politicized, “bait and switch” resolution that condemned a newspaper ad by MoveOn.org. The amendment, offered by Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX), expressly stated that the Senate would condemn “any effort to attack the honor and integrity” of “all members of the United States Armed Forces” […]

Yesterday, 341 members of the House voted to pass a companion resolution to that of Cornyn’s. They, too, face the same question.

And as for the meta-narrative, I think memekiller, in comments yesterday, touched on the right idea: progressives honor the troops but disparage their mission. For conservative clowns like Limbaugh, it’s the other way around.

As far as I can tell, not a single Republican official has distanced himself or herself from Limbaugh’s comments. Stay tuned.

Thanks for the shout-out.

Just did a Google News search and the only newspaper to carry it is the Baltimore Sun, and not in the most positive way. Kind of undermines the complaint that the news doesn’t run with this stuff because “we brought it on ourselves” by not having an organized media campaign.

Shills. Not suckups.

  • I wouldn’t hold my breath. The republicans will never say anything bad about their base. Unlike our party.

  • I hope that they nail Flushie to the wall on this one. Of course, the problem is that we have a “phony” Democratic majority in Congress, so I won’t expect a comparable resolution forthcoming.

    It’s a known fact that the No Peace, More War Movement only “support the troops” when it fits within the Bush Gang’s narrative.

  • I won’t expect a comparable resolution forthcoming.-JKap #3

    Fasioning a PR machine is a good idea people should denounce idiots like Limbaugh, but we don’t want a comparable resolution from Congress. What Rush Limbaugh or MoveOn or anybody else does with his or her free speech is not the business of Congress. Might I remind folks…

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

  • Great idea rush to silence those that might just say how awful they were treated over there and how badly the conflict is going. I can imagine the same crap went on back when I served in Vietnam; call them cowards when they question policy.

  • Let’s bring up the point that Oxy-Rush GOT PAID to say these things.
    His outlet is part of the ABC network media conglomerate. NBC & CBS would love to bury the competition, right?

  • Add to the mix the upcoming issue of Pat Buchanan’s American Conservative magazine, whose cover features a photo of Gen Petreaus with the title of the lead article, Sycophant Savior. The article is by retired COL Andrew Bacevich, whose son, 1st LT Andrew Jr, was killed in Iraq earlier this year. Dont expect loud Republican denunciations on this one either. You can find the artice, with a copy of the cover, at:
    http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_09_24/article2.html

  • “Honestly, I can’t remember the last time the Democratic Message Machine was this swift. In fact, I can’t remember the last time I thought the Democrats had a Message Machine.”

    Neither can I. However, I can remember the last time I thought that it’s stupid to waste time on such inconsequential matters when the world is in crisis, a crisis of our making–about ten seconds ago. When there’s a rabid dog loose in the living room, we’re worrying about the food the kitten spilled in the kitchen. Sheesh.

  • Did Kerry really use the term “Chicken Hawk”? Wow.

    Up next, a vote to censure John Kerry for calling all “real” Americans Chicken Hawks!

  • I think before the resolution is fashioned a whole string of wingnut hate mongers should be dragged in front of congress and the litany of egregious statements should be entered into the congressional record

  • Fasioning a PR machine is a good idea people should denounce idiots like Limbaugh, but we don’t want a comparable resolution from Congress

    No. Our resolution should be completely different. It will demand respect based on military service for this country, unlike the Republican version that only forbids it for liberal organizations that refuse to polish a General’s medals for Bush to hide behind.

    What Limbaugh demonstrated, more than anything, is that such resolutions should be based on service rather than partisanship.

  • Watching our drug-addled, viagra-crazed, little Dominican boy-chasing would-be Goebbels finally get his – that will be one of the truly great events of my lifetime.

    Let’s see the Democrats introduce a congressional resolution condemning Rush the way the Confederates did with MoveOn and see how many of the Confederates actually support the troops enough to go against one of their own?

  • Is any Dem in Congress going to grow a pair and actually introduce a companion resolution to the MoveOn one they passed last week?

  • I just called my Rep’s office in DC. My Rep, Bart Stupak of Michigan, voted to condemn MoveOn.org, so I called his DC office. When I spoke to the young male page he listened until I mentioned that Stupak could lose his job over this, to which he SNORTED into the phone and said, “Sir, if you have anything else further to add…” What a snotty b*tch! If you’re a Michigan resident, call Stupak’s office, urge him to condemn Rush Limbaugh and give him hell for voting like a Republican!
    Stupak’s DC Office:
    (202) 225 4735

  • Pingback: In Honor (Redux) » Comments From Left Field

  • As a rule, Democrats and their allies are a little slow when it comes to organized outrage.

    You’re kidding about this, right? Democrats have been quick to slam anyone on the right for saying something they disagree with since Rush Limbaugh became a star. Isn’t that what all the Fairness Doctrine tripe is about?

  • Hey, I am a veteran and this kind of rhetoric causes an immediate angry reaction in me. Even if they disagree with my concerns and politics, I feel that veterans, especially combat veterans, have a special right to say what they want since they have paid the price that most other citizens have not.

    Being a veteran does not make you right, but you are still a veteran and a soldier. The word “phony” doesn’t fit in any context unless you are only playing at being a soldier. (Although the words “phony patriot” might fit Rush Limbaugh.)

    Combat experience has long lasting emotional residuals (and not all bad, by the way) which are the basis of the quick and forceful responses by Senators Webb, Kerry and the other Democrats who spoke out. It touched a sensitive and special part of them. I wish Kerry had let this emotion work for him during his campaign and it is clear that Webb won partly because you just knew that he was showing real feeling when he discussed the Iraq war.

    Rush Limbaugh has always asserted that he is only in the business for the money. If the money stops flowing (the way it did with Don Imus for a while) maybe he would think a little before inserting foot into mouth.

  • “This disgusting attack from Rush Limbaugh, cheerleader for the Chicken Hawk wing of the far right, is an insult to American troops…. He is an embarrassment to his Party, and I expect the Republicans who flock to his microphone will now condemn this indefensible statement.”

    Had Kerry responded to maddening situations with genuine anger rather than carefully measured responses, I can’t help but think he would have been sitting in the Oval Office today.

  • Haik #6 is right. Let us not sully the First Amendment with another Senate resolution.

    There are abundant, Constitutional ways to express our outrage over what Rush Limbaugh said..

    I’m also concerned that this selective outrage further serves to deify the military. Where’s the outrage when Limbaugh and Hannity et al call liberals traitors and commies, which they do every single day?


  • sharon: You’re kidding about this, right? Democrats have been quick to slam anyone on the right for saying something they disagree with since Rush Limbaugh became a star. Isn’t that what all the Fairness Doctrine tripe is about?

    Since the Fairness Doctrine is 2 years older than Rush Limbaugh, I highly doubt it. It did, however, intend “to ensure that all coverage of controversial issues by a broadcast station be balanced and fair” (sound familiar?).

    If you get most of your news from Fox News or AM talk radio (and I would venture to guess that you do) then you really have no frame of reference to understand just how “unbalanced” discourse has become on these outlets. The entire medium of AM radio is overrun with conservative talk (91% to 8%) and I believe this is because AM radio is a dying medium and progressives tend to get their information in a more technologically savvy way.

    The problem is that people like yourself get most of their information fed to them and so there is no impetus for change. Those of us with more diversified exposure to information cannot help being puzzled how a group of people (roughly, 30% of Americans) could be so wrong so often and still continue down the same path without missing a beat.

    Well, the Fairness Doctrine might fix things for you by forcing a medium that would otherwise have no incentive to do so, to show that there’s another side of every argument. That is completely gone on AM radio, and may of us here would argue that it is gone on FM radio and broadcast television (though not as far gone).

    What good has come of your ideology, sharon? You live in a world where you believe nearly everything that is spoon fed to you by your medium of choice. They will continue to spoon feed you the same flawed information until you and the rest of the 30% demand something different (our beloved free market at work)… then there’s the Fairness Doctrine.

  • The only way we are going to balance the hate of the rightwingnuts is to bring The Fairness Doctrine back. And that was a great response #27 JTK. The PUBLIC airwaves should not be dominated by conservative tripe.

  • Instead of a resolution I think the Dems should just make things very uncomfortable for any ReThug that goes to Flush’s wank sessions:

    “Why is Vice President Cheney fraternizing with a man who denigrates our soldiers?”

    Repeat as necessary.

  • Posturing is easy. It’s ACTION that’s hard. Let’s see the Dems put something other than empty words out there.

  • These resolutions are meaningless posturing that do nothing to the First Amendment. It’s showboating. I know we’re above it, like negative advertising, but it does work.

  • I’m with Jen Flowers@#18 I defend to the death, your right to prove you’re a hypocritical asshole. Sorry Voltaire.

    I’m glad the Dems are actually showing a wee bit of courage in condemning these remarks. Do I want a debate in the Senate or House? Hell no. Duh, 1st Amendment, free speech and all that. Do I want the Dems nationally to condemn the language and hypocricy of the right nationally en mass every time they see it? Hell yes! Some loud and public disapprobation every time an asshole offends, said by enough people, loudly enough, might eventually break into the mainstream press. And then maybe we can have a national conversation about it. But alas, like the national conversation about poverty we were gonna have after Katrina, I fear this is another convo that will fall by the wayside.

    And I’m all fot re-apprising the fairness doctrine too. And something along the lines of “truth in advertising” to stop the Swift Boating of whoever the right attacks next.

  • Proving that their outrage against smearing men in uniform was a bogus political ploy, the GOP remain silent when a far right smear machine which has Bush and Cheney for guests blatantly smears soldiers on active duty.
    Get the picture Dems who voted to condemn Move On. You got played because the repubs don’t give a shit about the soldiers unless they can use them politically. Where’s the senates shock and outrage amendment to condemn Rush Limbaugh’s comments.

    When will dems ever get it…republicans are not statesmen, they don’t have ideologies, they condemn purely for political reasons and keep suckering Dems into it but when the shoe is on the other foot…they demonstrate their hypocrisy with silence.

    At least Move On’ ad had statistics to back up their suggestion…Limbaugh’s attack was just an insult. AREN’T THE DEMS WILLING TO STOOP TO THE RIDICULOUS LEVEL OF THE REPUBLICANS AND INTRODUCE AN AMENDMENT CONDEMNING A RIGHT WING ORGANIZATION FOR SMEARING MEN IN UNIFORM? IF NOT, STOP GOING ALONG WITH REPUBLICANS WHEN THEY DO IT. Half the dems in the Senate went along with it making the democratic senate half fool.

    Not to be undone Here comes the House showing themselves to be even bigger fools. If anything Rush’s pathetic insults demonstrate that the congress should not be spending its collective time condemning ads and talk shows. If individuals want to condemn…go for it. But it’s not the job of our elected officials to be involving themselves in such petty situations. Someone needs to condemn the senate and the house for such involvement.

    Did you think it would score you popularity points…it didn’t…it got move on a half million in donations and just made the senate look like petty fools. Where is Senator Byron Dorgan’s D-Neb outrage at Rush amendment since his comments were much worse than move on’s. Dug a hole and is now silent and sulking. Just pathetic…got played again huh?

  • The problem with this criticism of Limbaugh is that he was referring specifically to people who were pretending to be soldiers who had witnessed atrocities, when in fact they had either lied about the events, never been in Iraq/Afghanistan, or never even served in the military. Because you gobble down what Media Matters tells you, google Jesse Macbeth. There was no slander of the troops, and as I was actually listening to the show yesterday when this comment came about, if memory serves he was actually talking to a member of the armed forces at the time (the caller).

    Then again, you might think it’s all a massive conservative conspiracy, in that case there is no hope for you.

  • I was an early responder, possibly the first to call for a Congressional censure of Limbaugh, and certainly the first to ask others to contact their representatives with demands to do so.

    But the bigger question is whether the effort to censure gets sustained till it reaches a floor vote. I believe we should push for it daily until it does.

    Here’s the questions I now put to Congress:

    1) if you censor an advocacy organization for its personal critique of a general, do you plan to do so to counter a critic of soldiers of lesser rank? If not, I can only presume that supporting the troops means ‘supporting commanding generals’ and you really do not give a whit about the men and women in the front lines, risking their lives.

    2) What message do you plan to send to those troops and to all our younger citizens you intend to recruit for military service?

    To everyone else, I hope you ask similar questions when you contact your Reps and Senators today.

  • Pingback: The American Street » Blog Archive » Persist in support of the troops!

  • Media Matters just busted Rush editing the audio and transcript of the incident. He’s panicked beyond belief. Good. Mr. “can’t serve, got a pimple on my butt” has gotten away with too much.

  • Pingback: Chuck Adkins › Editorial: Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly and the Liberal Witch Hunt
  • Pingback: Who is Jesse Macbeth? : [H] Hegemonic Pundit
  • Pingback: All Spin Zone » Redeploying the Phony Brigade

  • Just in case you want to get the story correct next time, Rush was talking about a real phony soldier. There was a news story on ABC that highlighted people pretending to have served. Rush was referring to that story and has said so now dozens of time. Nice job drive by media.

  • Rush is only in it for the money. Sounds like a wise move to me. He’s making megabucks, unlike hollywierd, which is loosing thier shirts on movies portraying the US military as the bad guys.

    • Comments are closed.