The Rhetoric of the Far Right: Exposing it to make a far more effective case to the rest of America. To define the issues, and to define the Right itself.
"Breaking News: Rush Limbaugh reverses position, and now Condemns Congress over MoveOn ad censure."
It’s about time someone came to their senses.
The bill condemning MoveOn.org, for its "General Petraeus/General Betray Us?" word play, represents an alarming new trend to legislate speech. And it is one Congress has absolutely no business engaging in.
Yet few have spoken out over what an inappropriate use of the Legislative process this was.
That is, until now:
.....
One of the self professed stalwarts of American freedom and liberty, and one of the more influential voices in America this decade, tried to set the record straight:
It represents one of the most outrageous abuses of federal power in modern American history.
Who was this erstwhile savior of the American way of life, liberty, and the "don’t tread on me or try to legislative my values or right to speech" persona that helps define our country?
None other than that far right media figure, "Rush Limbaugh" himself.
Hopefully now, the House and Senate will reconsider just how far they went over the line when they decided to pseudo legislate "appropriate" definitions of patriotism, over a silly play on words that some found offensive.
Perhaps those who do not believe that Limbaugh grotesquely misrepresents, distorts, and applies wildly differing standards when he seductively addresses a large portion of our nation each day (as well as our troops over armed services radio), will also come to realize, as even Rush himself has, how overbearing this Big Brother like legislative act was -- whatever, like Rush, their own personal opinions of the ad itself.
Except for one small, tiny thing.
It turns out that Limbaugh was not referring to the MoveOn Condemnation vote.
Then what was it that, in his words, "represents one of the most outrageous abuses of federal power in modern American history"?
An Executive power grab unparalleled by any ever seen before in America? A rewriting of the Constitution without actually rewriting it, but by ignoring it? A perpetual pattern of Executive legislation accomplished by flagrantly changing Congressional laws, and passing it off as "interpretations"? The alteration of public information, in public documents, in order to support a predetermined philosophical view? The clamp down upon the free flow of public governmental and governmentally researched information that helps serve as the backbone of our democracy? What?
These are all pretty outrageous abuses of federal power. Which one of these was it?
None of them.
It turns out Limbaugh was referring to something very similar to the MoveOn condemnation vote, except far more powerful.
But what could be so similar, yet more powerful than a bill, passed by both Houses, and enacted into "law" as an official United States condemnation of speech it did not like?
Here’s your answer: A letter. That some Senators wrote. To media conglomerate Clear Channel Communications. Criticizing Rush’s remarks.
It scolded him for using the term phony soldiers, in a context in which, despite Limbaugh’s pleas, it seemed to be referring to soldiers who did not agree with Limbaugh’s position on the war.
.....
General Norman Swarzkopf, one our greatest American warriors, who also believed that the Iraq action in March of 2003 was ill advised, once stated: "Any soldier should be anti-war." Which gives them, of all people, the right to be. So naturally Rush’s "phony soldiers" comments, so easily "misinterpreted" (according to Rush and some others) as they were, riled some people. Particularly soldiers. And particularly coming on the heels of the MoveOn General Petraeus ad.
The world according to Rush, and any of those in Congress who voted to legislatively censure MoveOn, but found the act of a similar "letter" written by a few dozen Senators nonetheless abusive, is this:
An ad that suggests that a General has betrayed our trust in that, in the manufacture of a critical and highly publicized report, he would skew the data upon which we and our troops depended in order to make the best decision about Iraq, is worthy of an actual act of the Legislature to formalize our widespread condemnation; whereas a simple letter, in this same climate, by some Senators chiding Limbaugh for his similar use of the more widely inflammatory "phony soldiers" comment, "represents one of the most outrageous abuses of federal power in modern American history."
It reminds one of the time that George Bush, Sr., stated "I have nothing but contempt and anger for those who betray the trust by exposing the name of our [CIA operative] sources. They are, in my view, the most insidious of traitors," a few years before George Bush, Jr.’s Administration did exactly that by outing covert operative Valerie Plame as some sort of political payback. And yet the political ramifications for that outrageous act were virtually non existent.
Imagine what the Far Right could have done with that, had it been President Bill Clinton who had rightly called those who fostered the outing of a CIA operative as "the most insidious of traitors," and the highest levels of the Hillary Clinton Administration, and not the Bush Administration, that subsequently did exactly that as political payback.
It makes one wonder what it would be like if Limbaugh, and the rest of the far right talking heads cabal, were on the correct side of the issues. Or, one should say, actually had the facts on their side.
Democrats, instead of uttering so many "conclusions" about this cabal that continues to often dominate the debate and get so many of its erstwhile members elected to high office, must begin to focus on using the Far Right’s own logic and statements to more credibly -- that is, to the rest of America -- make an effective case against it. And in so doing, begin to correctly define the issues, and take back some modicum of control over the debate. Or at least keep it out of the hands -- mouths, rather -- of a Far Right that has literally hijacked the republican party over the past ten years, and yanked the country along violently to the right, willingly or not, right along with it.