Senator Tom Harkin is exactly the type of "phony vet" Rush Limbaugh was referring to.
As our troops are engaged in an epic battle against sworn enemies of America, our elected officials take to the Senate floor, whining about a passing comment by a talk show host.
On Monday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid scored a "twofer." He burnished his "pro-troop" credentials while at the same time, attacking Rush Limbaugh. This was a masterful "gotcha" moment. Senator Reid implored his fellow Senators to join him in condemning Limbaugh for a "hateful" and "unpatriotic" attack on U.S. troops. This, in response to a comment about "phony vets" made by Rush Limbaugh.
Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa threw in his two cents, wondering aloud, on the floor of the U.S. Senate, if maybe Limbaugh "was just high on drugs again." Left unspoken was the fact that distinguished Senator Tom Harkin is exactly the type of "phony vet" Limbaugh was referring to.
"Phony vets" are people like Harkin, who claimed in his 1992 bid for the presidency that he had served as a fighter pilot in Vietnam. Eight years later, Harkin boasted he had served a year in Vietnam flying F-4s and F-8s on combat air patrols. Oops, it turns out those claims were phony. Hence the term "phony vet."
Turns out this particular "phony vet" had not seen combat in Vietnam, as he was busy serving as a ferry pilot in Atsugi, Japan. Well, says Harkin, what he really meant was that he was a Vietnam-era vet. Having explained away this deliberate falsehood, Harkin emerged unscathed, unchastened and fully qualified to condemn Limbaugh for even uttering the term that so described him. Senator Harkin now qualifies as a "Phony Vet With Chutzpah."
If Harry Reid and Tom Harkin, elected officials in the "world's greatest deliberative body," were really as "pro-troop" as they would have you believe, one has to wonder why neither of them has uttered a word of condemnation about the disgraceful treatment meted out to returning troops by Oakland Airport.
Last Thursday, 204 Marines and soldiers who were returning from Iraq were not allowed into the passenger terminal at Oakland International Airport. This was not a security measure. This was a slap in the face to our fighting men and women. Met with utter silence by the aforementioned "pro-troop" Senators who managed such exquisite outrage over the phrase "phony vet."
I guess these Senators were too busy doing the people's business. Like trying to sneak through enhanced hate crime legislation that Bush had promised to veto, by attaching it to the defense appropriations bill. This is called "playing politics" with our troops.
No matter how you spin it, using our troops to score political points against Rush Limbaugh is shameful. Almost as shameful as "stealing honor" by lying about combat experience in Vietnam. Almost as shameful as using troops as political fodder for enhanced rights for gays.
NancyVideo@aol.com
http://www.RightBias.com
Read more articles by Nancy Morgan
The politicians are masters of keeping the electorate engaged with nonsense issues such as the "phony Vet" issue and the moveon.org ad in the NY Times. Again, we get the government we deserve.
I'm no fan of Limbaugh either. In the end, Rush may do more to harm the Republican Party in 2008 than he did to help it in its heyday in the 1990's. He's marching the neocons right over the cliff. But, at least Rush isn't a phony vet. Rush is a bona fide chicken hawk.
Greg in NY
Comment by GreginNY | October 3, 2007
Rush Limbaugh was ineligible for the Vietnam draft when he flunked out of college because of his medical classification due to back disease. Whether or not that makes him a "chicken hawk" or not, I'd say he's every bit as qualified to comment on the war as a Senator who completely fabricates his Vietnam war experience. Or a vice president who does the same. Or a president who "chicken hawk"'d it himself, skipping out on Vietnam, and then sending American troops into no fewer than six foreign combat operations. As concerned as you are with real, meaningful issues, and not trivialities like political ads, or who's a "phony vet" (or a "chicken hawk"?), I can't believe it matters that much to you…
Comment by Patrick Mulligan | October 5, 2007