I have diaried before about Rush Limbaugh. In the most recent dustup about his phony soldiers comment I have remained relatively quiet(other than an e-mail), mostly because of the number of diaries and the quality of those diaries. Coming on the heels of the conservative hooraw over the moveon.org ad, (which Mr. Limbaugh participated in) it felt like horrible irony. On the one hand, what is sauce for the goose (We must denounce that ad!!), should certainly be sauce for the gander (Rush, only a nimrod could believe that you were really only referencing one soldier, and your evolving defense does you no credit at all.) On the other hand, I am a firm believer in freedom of speech and of the press, that both the moveon.org ad and Rush's idiocy are both protected. However, now comes Steven Adubato making a very strained and somewhat silly defense of Rush.
For those unfamiliar with Mr Adubato, he is a media analyst for MSNBC. On msnbc.com he has written this column. Headlined
Don’t rush to judge 'phony' soldiers' comments
He starts off rather strong.
I am not a fan of radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh. I’ve been very critical of him in the past for what I often see as his nasty, personal and downright mean on-air commentary and behavior. I was especially critical of him earlier this year on MSNBC when he went after actor Michael J. Fox during last year’s congressional campaign for doing TV spots promoting Democrats who support stem cell research.
Well, almost everyone handed Rush his head on that one, so much so that Mr. Limbaugh did the unthinkable. According to Mr Adubato...
Instead of simply disagreeing with Fox’s argument on stem cell research, Limbaugh attempted to mimic Fox by flailing his arms and implying that Fox may have not taken his medication before doing the TV spot. Sure, Limbaugh apologized later, but one had to wonder what medication Limbaugh was or was not on that would explain such outrageous and absurd on-air behavior?
I've emphasized this because, well he made an apology...
OK. I need to apologize. I was wrong, because I speculated he either didn't take his medication or he was acting -- never said the word "faking." Now, if you've got -- if you people on the left want to equate acting with faking, I mean, go ahead. George Clooney would be a faker. All your favorite actors -- we'll call them fakers. I never used the word.
Rush Limbaugh 10/26/06
But, it was the same "apology" he has made previously, i.e. a qualified one. He spent most of the minutes leading up to this "apology" saying that the liberal media outlets were "taking him out of context" (sound familiar) or "speeding up video from the ditto cam" to exaggerate his portrayal of Fox's mannerisms.
Now, despite Mr Adubato's strong condemnation of Rush's antics, he continues...
Since then Limbaugh has been involved in many other controversies. The latest involves the "phony soldiers" comments that Limbaugh made on his Sept. 26 radio program when talking to a caller who was blasting critics of the Iraq war. Said the caller, "What’s really funny is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and talk to the media." Instinctively, Limbaugh responded: "the phony soldiers."
There it was, clear as day: Limbaugh, sitting safe and sound in his New York radio studio, far away from the combat, the bombs and the life-and-death realities facing soldiers of all political stripes and beliefs, having the gall to use "phony soldiers" because they disagree with him and President Bush’s policy on Iraq.
He does go on and defend Media Matters for America and their posting of his transcript, and also mentions the argument where if he was referring to one soldier, why did he use the plural, but then he makes an odd segue...
If he misspoke, he never apologized and took responsibility for what he said on the air. It’s unfortunate, because if he had, then retired Army Gen. Wesley Clark might not have had the ammunition to call for Limbaugh to be taken off Armed Forces Radio.
Clark has argued that public dollars should not be used to support Limbaugh’s attacks on U.S. soldiers. I understand Clark’s position and greatly respect his experience. But as hard as it is for me to say it, and has (sic) reprehensible as I think Limbaugh can be at times in his on- air commentary, I believe it’s wrong to take him off Armed Forces Radio.
Hmmm, okay, Stephen finds him reprehensible, but it's wrong to take Rush off Armed Forces Radio? Why, pray tell?
The fact is, Limbaugh has had a long history of being supportive of the American military. On countless occasions, he’s been there for the troops. I’m convinced he cares deeply about U.S. soldiers, and while I believe he said something really stupid by calling war critics "phony soldiers," I can understand how in a live, unedited, spur-of-the-moment situation someone who spends so many hours on the air can say something so dumb. It happens a lot. The fact that Limbaugh didn’t own up to it and say it was dumb and insensitive as well as apologize to all the troops, including those who disagree with him on Iraq, is unfortunate. As for Limbaugh’s "I was taken out of context" quote, give me a break. Media Matters just reported what he said and that was all it took. The reason I say Limbaugh shouldn’t be taken off of Armed Forces Radio is that for many soldiers who are dealing with an unimaginable daily existence, Limbaugh provides some respite, some relief, some entertainment, and maybe best of all, a diversion from fighting the war itself.
No examples given of being "supportive of the American military", no examples given of the "countless occasions, he's been there for the troops". And the last reason makes even less sense, once again
The reason I say Limbaugh shouldn’t be taken off of Armed Forces Radio is that for many soldiers who are dealing with an unimaginable daily existence, Limbaugh provides some respite, some relief, some entertainment, and maybe best of all, a diversion from fighting the war itself.
So, Mr Adubato, it's perfectly okay for Mr Limbaugh to defame dissident troops, lie about the defamation and then defend the defamation if he had said it, because it is "entertaining" to those troops? The problem though is that there is no counter voice on AFRN. Not one voice to say, "By the way, Rush is lying today"
Freedom of speech is very important to me, however I ask this of you Stephen, Subsidized speech is not free speech and Gen. Clark is right. No public funds should be used to broadcast Mr. Limbaughs venom any more. It is time to end the farce.