Phony Soldiers, Phony Outrage, And Phony
Patriotism
By: Christopher G. Adamo
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.”