Patterico's Pontifications

10/19/2007

How Else Can You Describe Harry Reid Other Than To Call Him A Liar?

Filed under: Politics — WLS @ 12:19 pm



[Posted by WLS] 

The letter Harry Reid sent to the head of Clear Channel Communications sold on E-Bay for more than $2 million this morning.  The letter was part of the “phony soldier” canard ginned up by the Dems as a response to the blowback suffered by MoveOn.Org after the “General Betray-Us” ad in the NYT.

Reid’s letter — a lame substitute for the GOP sponsored Senate Resolution that denounced the MoveOn ad with  72 votes, including 25 Dems — garnered only the signatures of 42 Dems and 0 Reps.

Among the comments in Reid’s letter were the following:

…Rush Limbaugh’s recent characterization of troops who oppose the war as “phony soldiers” is such an outrage.

Our troops are fighting and dying to bring to others the freedoms that many take for granted.  It is unconscionable that Mr. Limbaugh would criticize them for exercising the fundamentally American right to free speech. Mr. Limbaugh has made outrageous remarks before, but this affront to our soldiers is beyond the pale.

….it is clear that Mr. Limbaugh’s insult is directed at thousands of American service members.

Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh’s unpatriotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast. We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a “phony soldier.” We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and to ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments.

This morning, after it was clear that Rush had absolutely humiliated the Dems who signed the letter by putting the original up for auction, and raising $2 million that will go to a Marine families survivor fund, Reid goes to the Senate floor and makes the following statement: 

REID: MADAM PRESIDENT, EARLY THIS MONTH I CAME TO THE FLOOR TO DISCUSS SOME COMMENTS MADE BY RUSH LIMBAUGH. FOLLOWING MY REMARKS, MORE THAN 40 OF MY SENATE COLLEAGUES AND I CO-SIGNED A LETTER TO THE CHAIRMAN OF CLEAR CHANNEL, MARK MAY, TELLING HIM THAT WE WANTED HIM TO CONFER WITH RUSH LIMBAUGH REGARDING THE }  STATEMENTS HE MADE. I’VE SINCE SPOKEN TO MARK MAY ABOUT THIS. MARK MAY, IN FACT, CALLED ME REGARDING THIS LETTER. THIS WEEK, RUSH LIMBAUGH PUT THE ORIGINAL COPY OF THAT LETTER UP FOR AUCTION ON E-BAY. MR. PRESIDENT, WE DIDN’T HAVE TIME, OR WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN EVERY SENATOR TO SIGN THAT LETTER. BUT HE PUT THE LETTER UP FOR AUCTION ON E-BAY AND I THINK VERY, VERY CONSTRUCTIVELY, LEFT THE PROCEEDS OF THAT IT GO TO THE MARINE CORPS LAW ENFORCEMENTS FOUNDATION. THAT PROVIDES SCHOLARSHIP ASSISTANCE TO MARINES AND FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL WHOSE PARENTS FALL IN THE LINE OF DUTY. WHAT COULD BE A MORE WORTHWHILE CAUSE? I THINK IT’S REALLY GOOD THAT THIS MONEY ON E-BAY IS GOING TO BE RAISED FOR THIS PURPOSE. WHEN I SPOKE TO MARK MAYIC HE AND I THOUGHT THIS PROBABLY WOULDN’T MAKE MUCH MONEY, A LETTER WRITTEN BY DEMOCRATIC SENATORS COMPLAINING ABOUT SOMETHING.  THIS MORNING, THE BID IS MORE THAN $2 MILLION FOR THIS. WE HAVE WATCHED IT DURING THE WEEK. IT KEEPS GOING UP-AND-UP AND UP. THERE’S ONLY A LITTLE BIT OF TIME LEFT ON IT. BUT IT CERTAINLY IS GOING TO BE MORE THAN $2 MILLION. NEVER DID WE THINK THAT THIS LETTER WOULD BRING MONEY OF THIS NATURE. AND, FOR THE CAUSE, MADAM PRESIDENT, IT IS EXTREMELY GOOD. NOW, EVERYONE KNOWS THAT RUSH LIMBAUGH AND I DON’T AGREE ON EVERYTHING IN LIFE AND MAYBE THAT IS KIND OF AN UNDERSTATEMENT. BUT WITHOUT QUALIFICATION MARK MAY, THE OWNER OF THE NETWORK THAT HAS RUSH LIMBAUGH AND RUSH LIMBAUGH SHOULD KNOW THAT THIS LETTER THAT THEY’RE AUCTIONING IS GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT RAISES MONEY FOR A WORTHWHILE CAUSE. I DON’T KNOW WHAT WE COULD DO MORE IMPORTANT THAN HELPING TO ENSURE THAT CHILDREN OF OUR FALLEN SOLDIERS AND POLICE OFFICERS WHO HAVE FALLEN IN THE LINE OF DUTY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THEIR CHILDREN TO HAVE A GOOD EDUCATION. THINK OF THIS, MORE THAN $2 MILLION — THAT WILL REALLY HELP. THAT’S, AGAIN, AN UNDERSTATEMENT. THERE’S ONLY A LITTLE BIT OF TIME LEFT SO I WOULD ASK THOSE THAT ARE WANTING TO DO MORE, THAT THEY CAN GO TO HARRY REID LETTER AND IT WILL COME UP ON E-BAY. I ENCOURAGE ANYONE INTERESTED WITH THE MEANS  TO CONSIDER CONTRIBUTING TO THIS WORTHWHILE CAUSE. I STRONGLY BELIEVE WHEN WE CAN PUT OUR DIFFERENCES ASIDE, EVEN HARRY REID AND RUSH LIMBAUGH, WE SHOULD DO THAT AND TRY TO ACCOMPLISH GOOD THINGS FOR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE. THIS DOES THAT, MADAM PRESIDENT. MORE THAN $2 MILLION FOR A LETTER SIGNED BY THIS SENATOR AND MY FRIENDS.   

Harry Reid is either the dumbest person ever elected to the Senate, or he’s simply a bald-faced liar.

I actually think both are true. 

Chuck Schumer must break things in his office behind closed doors. 

  

147 Responses to “How Else Can You Describe Harry Reid Other Than To Call Him A Liar?”

  1. Come on, cut Harry some slack. After all, his job history consists of shaking down Nevada whorehouses.

    Mark (e29a60)

  2. Considering it’s Mark Mays, not Mayic, I think he’s more likely than not a liar.

    Know how else I can tell?

    He’s a politician, and his mouth was moving.

    Scott Jacobs (425810)

  3. The lady who bid $2 million last purchased an old teapot on e-bay.

    I’d wait until her check clears before crowing about it.

    Somebody recently sold the country of Belgium on e-bay.

    alphie (99bc18)

  4. Alphie,

    Hate to burst your bubble, but the lady is a well known philanthropist, who donates millions a year to hospices, hospitals, and other charities.

    And she’s been a listener and fan of Rush Limbaugh’s show since the begining.

    So do you think Harry and the rest are going to be matching Rush’s matching of the funds? I mean, Harry thinks there’s nothing more important, so surely he’ll pony up. At the very least Hillary can aford the 2.1 millions…

    Scott Jacobs (425810)

  5. This does that, madam president. more than $2 million for a letter signed by this senator and my friends. —Harry Reid

    Sorta like OJ Simpson boasting that his relationship with Nicole was all about improving the economy by creating legal and media jobs.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  6. Good for her if it’s true, Scott.

    Looks like a worthy cause.

    But why wouldn’t she just make the donation directly to the charity and avoid paying e-bay their cut?

    alphie (99bc18)

  7. Another indication of why Reid’s approval numbers are lower than Bush’s–in Nevada!

    Patricia (4117a9)

  8. #6
    Because Rush matched her contribution. So by going through EBay she essentially doubled her contribution.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  9. Well, Rush will match her bid, dollar for dollar, so the charity gets 4 million this way. And she gets a now-historical document, which she may someday donate elseware.

    LarryD (feb78b)

  10. *chuckles*

    Because it’s a slap in the face of Harry, that’s why. And it comes in a lovely case…

    Honestly, you just can’t accept that republicans would give so much, can you.

    First caller Rush took after he announced the final price, and who got it, was a guy that said Rush should make 1,000 copies of the 4-page letter, notorized them (or something along those lines) and sell those, and raise another million. Guy said he’d buy the first one.

    Don’t be sad, alphie… I’m sure Reid sends lovely Winter Holiday cards in leu of money, so it’s all right. I mean, it’s about the feeling, not the money, right?

    Scott Jacobs (425810)

  11. Good for her if it’s true, Scott.

    It’s true:

    Betty B. Casey is a noted philanthropist and supporter of the arts, particularly the Washington Opera, and donated prime real estate to the Salvation Army when objections to a planned mayoral mansion for D.C. killed the plan. She has also donated $6,900 to Barack Obama’s campaign, as well as to the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

    I’d say that’s a bit more than an “old teapot.” I also bolded a certain campaign contribution so you wouldn’t ‘miss’ it.

    But why wouldn’t she just make the donation directly to the charity and avoid paying e-bay their cut?

    Why doesn’t any of the rich Dems that signed the letter match the contribution like Rush did, Staunch Brayer?

    Harry Reid and every other of the 41 Dems that signed on got p3wnd…and niggling about small details won’t change that.

    Paul (d71395)

  12. Wait just one damn minute.

    I thought our troops in Iraq were dying for nothing because they were stuck trying to referee a civil war and we’ve already lost.

    But Senator Reid’s letter clearly states that they are over there fighting and dying for freedom.

    Harry Reid, neo-con chickenhawk imperialist warmonger? Or Harry Reid, lying defeatist? Harry’s opinion of just why our soldiers are over there is apparently based on whatever he thinks will score him the most points with moonbats like alphie at that moment.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  13. Harry Reid, neo-con chickenhawk imperialist warmonger? Or Harry Reid, lying defeatist?

    I smell a trick question… 😉

    Scott Jacobs (425810)

  14. Another point for you to contemplate, Staunch Brayer, as you head out to your lonely, grassy, moonbathed hill to bray despondently.

    Whenever Limbaugh runs a charity effort, he matches the contribution, or makes a large (at least several hundred thousand) one to kick off the effort.

    The reason he does this is to mock Brentwood liberals in their huge mansions and private jets that simply donate their time to a cause without parting ways with a small part of their considerable fortunes.

    Like I said, the Dems got p3wnd.

    Paul (d71395)

  15. Scott, it’s all of the above. :)

    Paul (d71395)

  16. Did anybody read all of Harry’s letter? My daughter could have written a more intelligible note when she was in second grade.

    Harry may very well be the stupidest person ever to sit in the Senate, and that would include the gallery seats.

    Steverino (990606)

  17. Look at who else signed the letter…anyone following this understood exactly what rush was saying..glad this backfired on these traitors….they all should pony up 2.1 mil or apoligize to everyone.. gardner

    gardner congdon (e22f51)

  18. Did anybody read all of Harry’s letter?

    You’re made of sterner stuff than I, Steverino.

    Paul (d71395)

  19. Politics 101: When egg splatters your face, wipe it off and SPIN it into an omelet. Harry ‘Pathetic’ Reid (check his Wikipedia entry, quick — before they change it back!) was stuck with only two options: ignore it and hope the story disappears, or, make this desperate attempt to insert himself as one of the good guys; the third and fourth options: admit defeat and be publicly humiliated, or, stick to his guns and keep attacking Limbaugh in futility, are no options at all in his eyes.

    And that’s why everything EVERY politician says needs to be scrutinized and compared to known facts. When faced with looking bad, or being caught in a lie, or falling on the wrong side of an issue … their only thought becomes “How can I minimize the damage? What words will save my image and allow me to be re-elected?” Even with Larry Craig, he’s employing the same mind-set in order to save his public image and be ‘re-elected’ by his wife and family.

    Icy Truth (8d362f)

  20. make this desperate attempt to insert himself as one of the good guys

    Icy truth: If Reid and the other Dems had pooled their resources and matched the contribution, Reid’s Senate Floor statement would have some merit. Some.

    Their failure to do so makes this desperate attempt to insert himself as one of the good guys truly pathetic.

    Paul (d71395)

  21. A letter with original signatures of all those Democrat Senators engaged in an attempt to censor freedom of speech deserved a high price. I wonder if ABC will auction off the two letters it received from the House and Senate Democrat leadership last year exercising the same kind of thuggery before airing their 9/11 special.

    In addition to liar for Ringside Harry, I would add, clueless, nitwit, nimrod, and douchenozzle as a start.

    daleyrocks (906622)

  22. Paul,

    There are 22 Republican Senators up for re-election next November, only 12 Democrats.

    The Dems may even win a filibuster-proof 60+ majority soon.

    Harry Reid is gonna hold his post for many, many years.

    I think it is the neocons who have been “pwned.”

    alphie (99bc18)

  23. Harry Reid won’t win re-election the next time he’s up.

    WLS (bafbcb)

  24. There are 22 Republican Senators up for re-election next November, only 12 Democrats.

    The Dems may even win a filibuster-proof 60+ majority soon.

    Look at their job approval numbers recently?

    I can’t wait to see the Dems numbers after this latest stunt.

    Harry Reid is gonna hold his post for many, many years.

    Then he’ll provide us with an endless font of mockable material.

    I think it is the neocons who have been “pwned.”

    As will you, Staunch Brayer, as you try to deflect this shellacking…a retaliation effort over the MoveOn inncident that blew up in their faces like an IED.

    Paul (d71395)

  25. #20 Their failure to do so makes this desperate attempt to insert himself as one of the good guys truly pathetic.

    I agree. Rush kicked his ass, and now Reid is scrambling to make it look like Limbaugh actually came over to HIS side in supporting the troops.

    Icy Truth (8d362f)

  26. Then he’ll provide us with an endless font of mockable material.

    I guess that’s the point, Paul.

    By playing to the perpetually enraged right wingers, the neocon’s have lost everything that matters (i.e. actual political power).

    And I think the right wing entertainment business is running outta steam, too (repitition is an entertainment business killer).

    Better to burn out than fade away?

    Is that the point?

    alphie (99bc18)

  27. Is that the point?

    No, the point is that your man Dingy Harry got his ass kicked, and watching you flail about desperately trying to deflect that fact is comedy gold.

    Paul (d71395)

  28. Aaah, I see,

    A soccer hooligan “victory.”

    Who cares if your team actually won or lost the game?

    alphie (99bc18)

  29. Phil, if you are reading this, this is what I meant when I wrote “at least Staunch Brayer is entertaining.”

    Paul (d71395)

  30. Who cares if your team actually won or lost the game?

    Staunch Brayer, you are like the defensive end that does a sack dance and taunts the backup offensive tackle while his own team is losing 45-0 with 1:30 left in the fourth quarter.

    Pure comedy gold.

    Paul (d71395)

  31. $4.2 million for a great charity is a “loss?”
    Liberals live in a wacky world.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  32. Alphie, you should probably wait until after the election before you start crowing. Historically, incumbents have, what, about a 99% reelection rate? Just because there are more Republicans up for reelection doesn’t necessarily mean the Dems will pick up seats.

    Eric (09e4ab)

  33. PS,

    All a majority of Americans see on this is Rush called a wounded vet a “phony soldier” (and remind folks of Rush’s embarrassing reason for not going to Vietnam himself).

    Military families are now donating to Democratic candidates as much as they are to Republican candidates…quite a change from before.

    This stunt will help the Democrats, too.

    alphie (99bc18)

  34. Military families are now donating to Democratic candidates as much as they are to Republican candidates…quite a change from before.

    And your source for this is…?

    Admit it, Staunch Brayer: Harry Reid and the Dems got p3wnd. At least you finally admit it was a “stunt.” Whether or not you admit that this blew up in the Dems faces, remains to be seen.

    Part of me hopes you don’t, so I can continue to mock you.

    Paul (d71395)

  35. Alphie:
    A majority of Americans see this as Democrats attempting to divert attention from themselves for refusing to stop a war they were elected to stop a year ago. In order to get elected, Democrats promised, promised and promised to stop the war. But since Democrats controlled the Senate and congress, war funding and troops levels in Iraq have increased. Yep that is some promise.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  36. Wait until Rush starts in on the 41 signors of the letter by using their Senate Financial Disclosure reports, and then continues to pound on them day after day for not putting up money for the charity themselves. Some of them are quite rich, while others are only rich.

    Rush is going to keep this up for weeks. He has 15-20 million unique listeners every week, and he’s going go grind up Harry and a couple others until they scream for it to stop.

    This is going to be his asbestos blanket when they start making noise about wanting some form of a “Fairness Doctrine” back again.

    WLS (bafbcb)

  37. 15 million a week, wls?

    3 million a day, every day?

    Sounds about right.

    The echo chamber defined.

    alphie (99bc18)

  38. The echo chamber defined.

    Hey everyone: I think Staunch Brayer is jealous over that “3 million a day, every day” stat.

    Paul (d71395)

  39. Alphie — yep, Arbitron has been confirming that for a couple of decades now.

    It kills you, doesn’t it?

    WLS (bafbcb)

  40. I didn’t even know Alphie had a site. Those numbers are pathetic. Now I feel sorry for him.

    WLS (bafbcb)

  41. Haha, thanks for the link, Paul.

    WLS,

    I kinda admire people who make it.

    Kudos to Rush.

    alphie (99bc18)

  42. I’m not, WLS. His comments here are more interesting than his blog posts.

    Paul (d71395)

  43. Rush and a little old lady donated $4.2 million to help the troops and their families. Meanwhile, the We-Support-the-Troops Democrats have donated zero.

    Show us the money Democrats.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  44. Haha, thanks for the link, Paul.

    I did’t link to your site, Staunch Brayer.

    I linked to your sitemeter numbers.

    Paul (d71395)

  45. Show us the money Democrats.

    How about it, Staunch Brayer? Why doesn’t any of the rich Dems that signed the letter match the contribution like Rush did?

    You still haven’t answered that question.

    Paul (d71395)

  46. Haha, Paul,

    I think the Dems will focus on making sure all kids get health insurance.

    And making sure no more kids have to have strangers pay for their education.

    It’s a little late in the game for the neocons to start pretending to care about the troops (See: Walter Reed, Iraq fiasco).

    alphie (99bc18)

  47. I think the Dems will focus on making sure all kids get health insurance.

    That dog-and-pony show went down in flames…

    And making sure no more kids have to have strangers pay for their education.

    With what? Surely you don’t suggest they pay for their own? Why, that’s simply Un-liberal!

    It’s a little late in the game for the neocons to start pretending to care about the troops (See: Walter Reed, Iraq fiasco).

    I ask again: why doesn’t any of the rich Dems that signed the letter match the contribution like Rush did?

    I also repeat:

    the point is that your man Dingy Harry got his ass kicked, and watching you flail about desperately trying to deflect that fact is comedy gold.

    It certainly is.

    I love it when I’m right.

    Paul (d71395)

  48. Rush Limbaugh and “Dingy” Harry Reid-The Letter

    ” He put the letter up for auction on eBay, and I think very very constructively, let the proceeds of that go to the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation that provides scholarship assistance to Marines and federal law enforcement personnel whose parents fall in the line of duty. What could be a more worthwhile cause? I think it’s really good that this money on eBay is going to be raised for this purpose. When I spoke to Mark May (sic), he and I thought this probably wouldn’t make much.”- Senator Harry Reid on the floor of the Senate, 10-19-07.

    This is an excerpt from a statement that Harry Reid made today in response to the astounding amount of money made on eBay for a letter from Sen. Reid and 40 other Democratic Senators to Mark Mays, CEO of Clear Channel, asking Mays to “confer” with Rush Limbaugh about his on-air remarks about so-called “phony soldiers”. The final bid came to $2, 100,100, setting an all time record for money raised on eBay for a charitable cause.

    For those readers not fully informed on the controversy (which the mainstream news media has conveniently ignored), Limbaugh, in a recent phone conversation on his radio show, made a reference to “phony soldiers”, this in reference to Jesse MacBeth, who had fraudulently claimed to be an Iraq War veteran, and who told of witnessing numerous atrocities carried out by fellow soldiers. As it turned out, MacBeth had washed out of boot camp, and, of course had never served in Iraq or anywhere else. He has recently pleaded guilty to fraud against the Veterans Administration. It was MacBeth to whom Limbaugh was referring as an example of “phony soldiers” dragged out by the left to discredit the Iraq War.

    In response, the left went crazy, claiming that Limbaugh had been talking about any soldier in Iraq who was against the war. Enter Harry Reid, the Democratic Senator from Nevada and Senate Majority Leader (whom Limbaugh calls, “Dingy” Harry.) Earlier this month, Reid came to the Senate floor to bash Limbaugh and his comments, referring to the fact that Limbaugh himself had never served in uniform. (According to Reid’s bio, either has he.) In addition to his remarks, Reid passed around a letter directed to Clear Channel (Limbaugh’s broadcast employer) CEO Mark Mays protesting Limbaugh’s comments and asking Mays to “confer” with Limbaugh. A total of 41 signatures were obtained, including Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd, all running for president, as well as Ted Kennedy.

    Think about that for a moment. The CEO of a broadcast company, regulated by the Federal Government, gets a letter from 41 senators asking him to “confer” with one of his employees (a private citizen no less). What was Mr Mays supposed to infer from such a letter? I’ll tell you what: Get Limbaugh under control or your broadcast license may be in danger. (Remember, Dems are trying to get the “Fairness Doctrine” revived.)

    Well, Mr Mays turned the letter over to Limbaugh, who promptly put it up for auction on eBay, along with a commitment to match the final bid-proceeds going to the Marine Corps-Law Enforcement Foundation. Bidding ended today (October 19, 2007) and the winning bid was $2,100,100. In the process, Limbaugh made a national laughing stock out of Reid, at least among those who don’t depend on the mainstream media for their news. The mainstream media ignored the story, seeing it for what it was-a public relations disaster for the left.

    So now, Reid, with egg all over his face, is trying to save some of that face with today’s statement:

    …..”This morning, the bid is more than 2 million dollars for this. We’ve watched it during the week. It keeps going up and up and up. There’s only a little bit of time left on it, but it certainly is going to be more than 2 million. Never did we think that this letter would bring money of this nature. And for the cause, Madam President, it’s extremely good….. I don’t know what we could do more important than helping to ensure that children of our fallen soldiers and police officers who have fallen in the line of duty have the opportunity for their children to have a good education.” (Bold font emphasis added by me).

    “We”.

    It gets even better.

    “So I would ask those that are wanting to do more, that they can go to the Harry Reid search-actually go on say “Harry Reid letter”, this will come up on eBay. I encourage anyone interested in this with the means to do so to consider bidding on this letter and contributing to this worthwhile cause.”

    ” I strongly believe that when we can put our differences aside, even Harry Reid and Rush Limbaugh, we should do that and try to accomplish good things for the American people.”

    So there it is. Harry Reid now tries to jump in and claim partial credit for this money being raised for a good cause. Notice how he uses the term, “we”, as though he and Limbaugh conducted a joint effort to auction off this letter. Of course, as of now, neither Reid nor the other signatories has made any commitment to match funds as has Limbaugh. But minutes before the bidding closed, there was Harry Reid urging others to bid. The man has the testicles of an elephant. What Senate staff aide brought this brilliant idea to Reid? During the auction process, Limbaugh humiliated the Senator from Nevada. Now the senator has doubled his own humiliation with this ridiculous effort at spin, damage control, whatever you want to call it.

    So what can we learn from this? What does this say about the credibility of the Democrat Senate Majority Leader? What does it say about the other signees, all Dems? What does it say about their efforts to control speech by their opponents? Finally, what does it say about the mainstream news media that has kept the story under wraps? (As I write this, I have checked the websites for ABC, CBS and NBC News. No mention of the story. CNN has reported it.) Will they say that the story was not worth reporting? Was it not worth reporting that Senate Democrats tried to take action and intimidate a broadcast company in an effort to harm a private citizen for speaking his mind-miscontruing his words in the process? Not worth reporting that the hated Rush Limbaugh turned the letter around on Reid, making him look like a total fool and drawing in a record amount for a worthy charity?

    Great job, Rush.

    gary fouse
    fousesquawk

    fouse, gary c (33b5ba)

  49. I think the Dems will focus on making sure all kids get health insurance.

    Excuse me. But in order to get elected, the Democrat’s focus and Democrat’s promise was to end the war. Did they lose their focus?

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  50. I’m amused by alphie’s attempts to put the lemonade back in the lemons.

    Jim Treacher (5e5b1e)

  51. I’m amused by alphie’s attempts to put the lemonade back in the lemons.

    You’re not the only one, Jim.

    Paul (d71395)

  52. I can’t believe he could make such a statement without announcing he’s putting up a dollar of his own money and urging his fellow “signing” Senators to match him. The mind boggles at Reid’s pettiness.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  53. alpo,

    But why wouldn’t she just make the donation directly to the charity and avoid paying e-bay their cut?

    Probably because ebay isn’t taking a cut. Well, that and the matching contribution from Limbaugh.

    Pablo (99243e)

  54. On sidenote, I was looking through the LAT for any mention of the letter auction and could find nothing in the last week. I contacted the ReadersRep and a man answered and I expressed my concern that the LAT appeared to have missed a somewhat important matter involving Rush & Harry Reid and a little letter and that it was funny they would miss this historic occurence and yet on Oct 4 were quick to report about the ‘phony soldiers’ bit… He stated, “Maybe we missed it because we were unaware of the letter being auctioned.”

    And this is why I don’t subscribe or buy the LAT.

    btw, a lovely Readers Rep called me back this afternoon and profusely thanked me for calling earlier and said she had routed my message to the appropriate reporter. I mentioned that I really truly hoped they wouldn’t muck it up and give Harry Reid the credit he is desperately and pathetically pandering for. She said, “Excuse me?”

    Dana (dc61c3)

  55. Paul,

    Why doesn’t any of the rich Dems that signed the letter match the contribution like Rush did?

    Anyone heard from John Kerry since he signed the stupid thing?

    Pablo (99243e)

  56. Harry Reid: Searchlight’s Dim-Bulb.

    And, he’s the Leader of the Pack!

    We are doooooomed!

    Another Drew (8018ee)

  57. Pablo,

    Anyone heard from John Kerry since he signed the stupid thing?

    Nah, he probably left the Senate buildings on Wednesday or early Thursday to go home for the weekend, missing all the hullaballoo.

    A weekly habit of his that came out during the 2004 campaign.

    Paul (d71395)

  58. Paul #57:

    Really, got a link for that? I’d always heard he left Thursday night, which wasn’t untypical for out of towners.

    Time

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  59. Time is certainly a reliable reporter especially when it’s source is the liberal Democrat.

    nk (6e4f93)

  60. I think Itsme has uncovered another ferocious smear campaign. SWIFTBOATERS!

    Pablo (99243e)

  61. I’m no fan of Reid’s, but I thought this was a classy move. In the process of getting one over on Reid, Rush ended up sending 4 million to a worthy charity and Reid congratulated him for it. Frankly, I don’t get the harsh responses.

    Doc Rampage (ebfd7a)

  62. Because he lied over and over again in his speech. That rather reduced the class.

    Had he just thanked Rush, he would have come across as classy. By lying about the nature of his letter, the support the smear letter had in the Senate (precisely 41 Senators from only one party and categorically not 100 Senators from each), and neither putting a dollar up himself nor either calling on his fellow smearing Senators to do so nor acknowledging Limbaugh’s matching donation, he was only petty and self-serving.

    Reid doesn’t do things for “classy” reasons. And it wasn’t even a classy move. It could have been, but his lies about the content of the historic letter and both his initial abuse of the power of his office and his further lies about the support he did not have make this a remaining serious political issue, for which he deserves denouncement.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  63. nk #59:

    In that case there must be some other good sources out there for Paul’s claim.

    Pablo #59:

    You’re right. It’s sort of nitpicky in the realm of stuff that gets tossed around, but I’m curious as to where this particular idea came from.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  64. I’m no fan of Reid’s, but I thought this was a classy move. In the process of getting one over on Reid, Rush ended up sending 4 million to a worthy charity and Reid congratulated him for it. Frankly, I don’t get the harsh responses.

    No, Rush donated 2.1 million. Casey’s money went right to the MC-LEF…

    And Reid didnt congradulate him. Reid tried to suggest he was a part of the effort, which he was not, in any way.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  65. Desribing Reid – Just the low hanging fruit could keep me busy for days – leading candidate for post partum choice, grifter, no talent hack, insensitive clod, for sale to the highest bidder, getting rich from government service………….

    daleyrocks (906622)

  66. You know what’s fun? When you’re mocking someone and they take you seriously. Good, good times.

    Pablo (99243e)

  67. Excellent point, Pablo 66.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  68. Pablo #66:

    Yeah, it was just too sophisticated to detect that mocking tone.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  69. I wonder if soldier hating Rush will see his contribution matched by the patriotic senators that have gone down on record brerating American troops and their combat commanders at every opportunity. The failure of Reid to get more dhimmierts to sign just shows that there are some dhimmierats who either aren’t completely braindead; on Soros payroll; or have a sliver of patriotism left.

    After reading Dingy Harry’s pathetic comments I am left wondering exactly who is lower on the evolutionary scale, Dingy or Alpho who just keeps plunging deeper into his own unique spectic tank each day.

    My guess is Dingy because he has the IQ to know what he is doing while Alpho seems to be a knee jerk kind of troll.

    Thomas Jackson (bf83e0)

  70. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/20/washington/20letter.html
    By STEPHANIE STROM
    Published: October 20, 2007
    After Rush Limbaugh referred to Iraq war veterans critical of the war as “phony soldiers,” he received a letter of complaint signed by 41 Democratic senators. He decided to auction the letter, which he described as “this glittering jewel of colossal ignorance,” for charity, and he pledged to match the price, dollar for dollar.

    NYT spins for Dingey

    Hazy (c36902)

  71. From the NY Times article, linked at #70:

    Marcus S. Owens, a lawyer who headed the Internal Revenue Service division that oversees charities and foundations, said the Casey foundation might incur taxes on its purchase because it would have difficulty demonstrating that buying the letter furthered a charitable purpose. “They’d have to establish the link between the transfer of money for that letter and promoting free speech,” Mr. Owens said, “and that’s going to be tough.”

    Wow, that’s a twist.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  72. After these 41 “We-Support-the-Troops” Democrat senators were humiliated, I suspect they sent their staffs into overdrive this weekend looking for some sort of military situation they can spin as an atrocity so they can feel morally superior again.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  73. #24 Look at their job approval numbers recently?
    To have a chance of winning, the Repubs need to field credible candidates. Here in NY, the repub party is brain dead. They fielded an unknown against Hillary last time around. In my congressional district, my rep, Dem. Gary Ackerman, ran UNOPPOSED! Unbelievable….

    sam g (8539e1)

  74. Itsme #71,

    Why wouldn’t the Casey payment be deductible as a donation to the Marine Corp, etc., fund?

    DRJ (67ced6)

  75. I saw the same thing that Itsme saw…

    It’s a legit quote, but I don’t think the guy has it right. The foundation wouldn’t need to prove any such link, since MC-LEF is a charity, and thus is likely fully tax deductable… Though the foundation donates so much to charity, it’s possible it maxes out each year anyways, so it’s amoot point.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  76. DRJ:

    Well first, if its a private foundation, I don’t think it’s really a deduction like an individual would take on a contribution. It may be more that a 501(c)(3) can only distribute funds or make expenditures in ways that further an exempt purpose.

    Not sure, but looking at the eBay page, it looks like the money is not going directly to the charity but to the seller (RB or his company or whatever).

    eBay

    The seller says, “The entire proceeds of this auction.. the entire high bid… will be donated to The Marine Corps – Law Enforcement Foundation…”

    Maybe it is too tenuous a connection between the sale and the donation to qualify as furthering an exempt purpose. Dunno.

    But interesting.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  77. Scott Jacobs #75:

    Well, except even if they “max out” on their distributions, don’t they still have to show that their expenditures furthered an exempt purpose?

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  78. On the other hand, RB wouldn’t have a problem taking a deduction on his match, which goes straight to the charity. Or so I’d assume.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  79. If the foundation is required by IRS regulations to distribute funds for charitable purposes – as it probably is – then it seems like this payment would satisfy that purpose. The foundation’s lawyer probably verified that the payment was in accordance with the its bylaws but I doubt that was a problem.

    DRJ (67ced6)

  80. DRJ:

    I would hope the transaction was set up in the first place in a way that would satisfy the requirements…and maybe eBay has a way of ensuring that the money goes straight to the charity and not by way of the seller.

    I’m just speculating on why this former IRS official had this take on it. That’s pretty much what I come up with.

    If it the money is going first through the seller, there may be a question about the “charitable purpose” connection. After all, a seller can always reneg and keep the money (hypothetically of course).

    I guess it would sort of be like me trying to take a deduction for giving my neighbor money to give to charity.

    As I say, just speculating.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  81. This seems the same as charity auctions where people bid on donated cruises, jewelry, fine art, etc., and the proceeds go to charity. There is often a middleman that handles the auction but I don’t think that taints the donation. My guess is there are probably IRS regs on this, and I imagine eBay has handled sales like this before.

    DRJ (67ced6)

  82. It may very well be that way, DRJ. That would make the most sense.

    But the former head of the IRS charities and foundations unit/department/whatever seems to have questions about it, and that makes me wonder.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  83. I’m thinking the former head probably knows quite a bit about the process.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  84. More on DRJ #81:

    Well, here’s what the eBay Giving Works sellers’ FAQ page says:

    Frequently Asked Questions for Sellers
    Here are some frequently asked questions about eBay Giving Works:

    * What is eBay Giving Works?
    * Who is MissionFish and what kind of relationship do they have with eBay?
    * Are there any special features that distinguish eBay Giving Works listings?
    * Do eBay Giving Works listings appear with all other eBay listings?
    * Are there any special requirements to list eBay Giving Works items?
    * How do I list an eBay Giving Works item?
    * Is there a minimum donation amount?
    * How is my donation collected and when will the nonprofit receive it?
    * Why does my credit card bill say MissionFish – Points of Light?
    * Will I receive a tax receipt for my donation?
    * Can I access a summary of my eBay Giving Works donations and tax deductions online?
    * Are there fees to list an eBay Giving Works item?
    * What is the eBay Giving Works Fee Credit Policy?
    * Are eBay seller fees paid for eBay Giving Works listings tax-deductible?
    * How can I request a refund for my donation?
    * What types of nonprofits join eBay Giving Works and what guidelines must they follow to be eligible for this program?
    * What if my favorite organization is not listed in the nonprofit directory?
    * Can my listing benefit multiple nonprofits?
    * Are there any particular rules or regulations that govern online fundraising?
    * Is eBay Giving Works offered internationally?

    What is eBay Giving Works?

    eBay Giving Works is a unique program that enables you to list your items on eBay and donate between 10% and 100% of the final sale price to your favorite nonprofit organizations. As a seller, this is a way to make a difference in your community while building your business on eBay.

    Sellers who participate in this program:

    * Differentiate their eBay listings with a distinctive ribbon icon.
    * Drive additional buyers to their items with specialized search functionality.
    * Tend to generate higher final sale prices (buyers typically pay more for items that benefit a nonprofit).
    * Enhance buyer loyalty by aligning with a cause.
    * Receive a receipt for their tax-deductible donations.

    Back to Top
    Who is MissionFish and what kind of relationship do they have with eBay?

    eBay selected MissionFish, a licensed nonprofit service of the Points of Light Foundation, to serve as the dedicated solution provider for eBay Giving Works. MissionFish’s valuable service and support includes: powering the nonprofit directory for eBay Giving Works; verifying that nonprofits are eligible for this program; collecting and disbursing sellers’ donations; providing sellers with tax receipts; and tracking sellers’ donations online.

    Back to Top
    Are there any special features that distinguish eBay Giving Works listings?

    There are a number of unique, value-added features that not only distinguish eBay Giving Works listings but also instill buyer trust and confidence. eBay Giving Works listings:

    * Include a distinctive blue and yellow ribbon icon that appears in the title bar of the listing on the View Item page and within search results.
    * Include the donation percentage and benefiting nonprofit information in the item’s description.
    * Appear in the eBay search engine, in the eBay Giving Works search engine, and on a dedicated page for the nonprofit on the MissionFish Web site.

    Back to Top
    Do eBay Giving Works listings appear with all other eBay listings?

    Yes, eBay Giving Works listings appear with all other listings on eBay. Additionally, eBay Giving Works listings appear within the eBay Giving Works search engine and on the selected nonprofit beneficiary’s “home page” on MissionFish, ultimately giving sellers three listing venues for the price of one.

    Back to Top
    Are there special requirements or conditions to list eBay Giving Works items?

    All eBay sellers who have a current account in good standing on eBay and MissionFish can create eBay Giving Works listings. Sellers must select PayPal or a credit card as one of the buyer payment options; however, this is not required for Motors listings. eBay Giving Works items may not be listed in the Real Estate ad format or Mature Audiences category.
    Back to Top
    How do I list an eBay Giving Works item?

    In the Pictures and Details section of the Sell Your Item form on eBay, you will be asked whether you would like to donate a percentage of your listing’s final sale price to a nonprofit. Click the “Add” link to select a nonprofit beneficiary and to designate your donation percentage (10%-100%). Once you have made your selections, complete the Sell Your Item form and submit your listing. Be sure to select PayPal or a credit card as one of the buyer payment options; however, this is not required for Motors listings. eBay Giving Works items may not be listed in the Real Estate ad format or Mature Audiences category.

    High-volume sellers are now also able to list eBay Giving Works items in bulk using eBay Turbo Lister and ChannelAdvisor.

    Note: If you have not registered with MissionFish, you will be prompted to create a MissionFish account to proceed with the listing. You will need to provide your credit card information to guarantee payment of your donation, and you must consent to terms in the MissionFish User Agreement. You will only have to complete this registration process once.

    Note: Because charitable fundraising is a highly regulated area subject to numerous state and federal laws, eBay has partnered with MissionFish to make charitable listing easy and has created very specific guidelines for allowing charitable solicitations on eBay. If you choose not to participate in the eBay Giving Works program but would like to donate all or a portion of your final sale price to a nonprofit that you will reference in your listing, you must obtain advanced written consent for the solicitation from the nonprofit and include a scanned version of this written consent in your listing. Learn more about eBay fundraising policies.

    Back to Top
    Is there a minimum donation amount?

    If your item sells, a $5 minimum donation is required per transaction for each eBay Giving Works listing in order to ensure that a meaningful gift will reach the nonprofit organization.

    Example
    Seller A decides to list a painting starting at $10.00 and donate 15% of the final sale price to support Nonprofit B. The painting sells for $30.00.

    Seller’s share:

    Nonprofit’s share:

    Payment from the buyer $30.00
    Donation amount: ($4.50)
    Balance of $5 donation minimum* ($0.50)
    eBay.com fees ($1.81)
    Net proceeds for the seller:
    Plus a tax receipt: $23.19
    $5.00

    Gross donation amount: $5.00
    MissionFish deduction: ($1.00)
    Net proceeds received by the nonprofit: $4.00

    *In this example, an additional $0.50 was collected from the seller to complete the $5.00 minimum donation.

    Back to Top
    How is my donation collected and when will the nonprofit receive it?

    Both eBay and MissionFish are committed to accountability and transparency in the management of donated funds. MissionFish, a licensed nonprofit service of the Points of Light Foundation, has the sole responsibility of collecting donations from sellers and redistributing the funds to benefiting nonprofits.

    When you register on MissionFish to list an eBay Giving Works item, you will create a seller account and place your credit card on file the same way that you do on eBay. After your item sells, collect payment from the buyer as usual. MissionFish will send you an email notification that includes the exact donation amount due and payment instructions. A credit card is the fastest and easiest way to pay your donation; however, MissionFish also accepts payments by Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) and bank-certified checks for donations greater than $1,000.
    ….

    Will I receive a tax receipt for my donation?

    A receipt for every donation that you make from the sale of an eBay Giving Works listing will be emailed to you and is also available when you access your MissionFish account.

    For tax purposes, the official date of your donation is the day that MissionFish sends the donation to the nonprofit. This happens on the 20th of the second month after your listing has successfully ended. This is important to know, because your tax deduction has to be claimed for the year in which it was made.
    http://givingworks.ebay.com/sellerFAQ/#8Giving Works

    So it looks like the seller collects the money and then donates it, and gets a tax deduction.

    So I guess it may depend on who the seller was in this case.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  85. OH MY GOSH, I DIDN’T MEAN TO POST THE WHOLE PAGE !

    CAN ANYBODY EDIT IT PLEASE?

    SORRY.

    Itsme (5ec76d)

  86. I think the page is helpful, Itsme, so I say leave it up. And thanks for looking it up.

    DRJ (67ced6)

  87. Well, it’s like if I only get to deduct $100 in donations from my taxes, but I donated $200 this year. I’ll only bother to prove the first 100, and not worry about the paperwork for the rest.

    And in all honesty, I doubt a foundation that gives millions of dollars away each year is going to worry about the paperwork behind this one, you know what I mean?

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  88. I am sure they are exactly the sort of people who would worry about the paperwork behind this, because it would be irresponsible to their mission to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on unnecessary taxes or get into legal trouble down the road. What I’d say is I’m sure this occurred to both the buyer and seller and their respective lawyer(s) have already looked into it. By now, each side’s legal team have probably discussed it too.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  89. The eBay guidelines explain what a seller (presumably Rush Limbaugh) has to do to donate sales proceeds to charity. I don’t think they address what the buyer (the Casey Foundation) must do, although I think both parties have a donative intent. Another issue is valuation. The buyer will receive the letter and the question is “What is the letter worth?” The willing buyer/willing seller test says it’s worth what the buyer paid for it but I don’t think anyone believes it’s worth $2.1M. The challenge for the buyer’s attorney will be to establish the letter’s reasonable value so that all value above such amount is a donation.

    DRJ (67ced6)

  90. DRJ #86 –

    Well, that is a nice thing to say about my mistake. But it is way more info than needed, so feel free to trim away if you like.

    Scott #87:

    I think your analogy applies to deductions from personal income tax or corporation taxes for charitable contributions, but how would it apply to 501(c)(3) foundations?

    In order to maintain their tax exempt status, all their distributions must be for charitable purposes and all their expenditures must further an exempt purpose. As I understand it, anyway.

    Christoph #88:

    I agree. I’d hope so, anyway.

    DRJ #89:

    I couldn’t find anything at the Giving Works page about buyers either. It looks like it’s all the seller’s doing.

    Valuation…hmmm…I wonder how much of a resale value it has? Not much, I’d guess.

    But I wonder if valuation really applies, as the rule seems to go to the purpose of the transaction. On the other hand, maybe it has to do with the distinction between a “distribution” and an “expenditure.”

    Nonprofit law is so arcane. In my experience, anyway.

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  91. Itsme, I think from a lot of your answers on different posts you’re more on the left of the political spectrum than I agree with and I often take issue with your opinions, but I’ve seen you also attempt to be intellectually honest and fair and overall made a good impression on me. Just FYI.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  92. As for how it works with a 501(c)(3), I have no earthly idea… I’ve taken accounting classes, but I’m by no means an accountant.

    I have classes on Monday, but if we don’t know by tuesday, I’ll ask out Corp Finance guy…

    Hell, I’ll corner either Swanson or Ostrowski and ask. They might well know. I know that O does some tax work for businesses, so this might bleed over a little… We’ll see.

    As far as resale value, they could, I would think, be able to claim it is worth at least as much as the next highest bid. Also, it has Obama, Clinton’s, Kerry’s… That’s three people who have saughtthe presidency all in one document that isn’t legislation. It is also, as Rush calls it, a stunning bit of “Did anyone bother to mention to them that they can’t do that?”

    I don’t recall the exact wording of the auction page (I didn’t mark it as a watched item, foolishly), but I remember words to the effect of “this is a deductable donation”.

    The reason being the 2.1 from the Casey Foundation never goes to Rush. It goes to the Auction facilitator, straight to the MC-LEF. That right there clear up the “well, they didn’t give it to the charity”, because quite often at charity auctions, it’s not, for example, the WWF doing the selling, it’s someone else doing it for them (checking bidders out, blah blah blah). So the way the money gets to the chairty isn’t unusual.

    It’s also possible the guy was just plain wrong. It isn’t outside the realm of posibility that he’s either got bad info on how/what the chairty is (1st amendment? what? how the hell did THAT come into play?), or a recent change in the tax code makes his knowledge incorrect.

    I lean toards the guy being wrong. As I said, I did a double take when he mentioned proving it’s relation to Free Speach. He had to be confused about something (maybe that the charity was set up specifically for this auction?). It really struck me as odd, and out of place.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  93. Christoph, thank you for the kind words. That means a lot.

    I know we all have our hot-button emotional issues, but I sense that you try to be even handed as well.

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  94. Swanson and Ostroski being instructors where I take classes. Meaning I’ll be asking on Monday…

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  95. I don’t. I am a passionate advocate. But I recognize you as someone who tries to be fair even when you disagree.

    If you mean do I try to accurate and find the truth, yes.

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  96. And why the hell aren’t you people in bed?

    Isn’t it past the old folks’ bed time?

    *runs for his life*

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  97. Scott #92:

    Interesting comments re valuation.

    However, it doesn’t look like the buyer’s money goes straight to the charity, at least not under a standard eBay Giving Works setup.

    See the verrrry long post (#84) I made from the webpage. According to eBay, the seller collects the money from the buyer and then makes the donation:

    After your item sells, collect payment from the buyer as usual. MissionFish will send you an email notification that includes the exact donation amount due and payment instructions. A credit card is the fastest and easiest way to pay your donation; however, MissionFish also accepts payments by Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) and bank-certified checks for donations greater than $1,000.

    Maybe they’ve set up something different though, who knows.

    I’m just guessing about what the former IRS official meant, but if he is assuming that it was the seller, not the buyer, making the charitable donation, then he is looking as to what the buyer/foundation can claim as a legitimate charitable or exempt purpose for the distribution or expenditure.

    Since the foundation made a particular comment about supporting free speech, he may have used that as the logical example. And if that were something they tried to present as an charitable or exempt purpose, well, he may be right that it’d be a bit of a stretch.

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  98. Christoph – Yes, an advocate, and yes a truthseeker, and you’ve surprised me with some of your opinions! I mean that in a good way.

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  99. Scott #96:

    When old folks have caffeine too late in the day, their little old brains make them type through the night.

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  100. But Rush isn’t the seller. The “seller” is just a middle man, just like for many of ebay’s charity auctions.

    Like the guy that holds the money for you and some dude at the bar when you bet on a game of pool. You aren’t giving HIM the money, but he holds it, and then gives it to the person who is supposed to get it. In this case, that would be the MC-LEF.

    When the Casey Foundation mentioned free speach, it was just their staement of why THEY were doing it, not what the donation was for…

    At least that is the sense I got from it.

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  101. Scott #100:

    Although the eBay page says it’s the seller who gets the tax deduction.

    But it would be interesting if there was some sort of pass-through setup.

    Here’s the seller’s profile for the eBay item:

    http://myworld.ebay.com/rush-letter-for-charity/

    Not that helpful, eh?

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  102. PS to Scott –

    About the “free speech” comment. Right, I agree. I just think he was using it as an example.

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  103. PPS to Scott –

    Here’s what the foundation put out about the purchase.

    “The Eugene B. Casey Foundation believes freedom of speech is a basic right of every citizen of this country. The purchase of the smear letter was to demonstrate their belief in this right and to support Rush Limbaugh, his views, and his continued education of us.”

    Itsme (e8e7f7)

  104. “Frankly, I don’t get the harsh responses.”

    Imagine if Nixon tried to take credit for the Oscars won by All the President’s Men.

    Jim Treacher (5e5b1e)

  105. Well the phony soldiers line was an insult to soldiers who oppose the war, and to pretend it wasn’t is absurd (lets just call it a lie) And of course others have attacked the leadership of the armed forces including Patreus, in the National Review; and pf course Patreus’ figures were bullshit and shown to be so. No counting of intra group violence: Sunni on Sunni or Shia on Shia for example.

    Of course that dosen’t mean I think Reid is especially bright but that’s not the point is it?

    “the ‘phony soldier’ canard ginned up by the Dems”

    A hack’s argument.

    blah (7b03e4)

  106. A hack’s argument.

    Shall we review?

    September 24,2007: Rush’s Morning Update

    The anti-war left has its celebrities, and one of them was “Army Ranger” Jesse MacBeth. Now, what made the 23-year-old “corporal” a hero to the anti-war crowd was not his Purple Heart or his being afflicted with post-traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq.

    No — what made “Army Ranger” Jesse MacBeth a hero to the left was his “courage,” in their view, off the battlefield. Without regard to consequences, he told the world the abuses he said he had witnessed in Iraq. American soldiers killing unarmed civilians — hundreds of men, women, and even children. In one gruesome account, translated into Arabic and spread widely across the Internet, MacBeth describes the horrors this way: “We would burn their bodies… hang their bodies from the rafters in the mosque.”

    Recently Jesse MacBeth, the poster boy for the anti-war left, had his day in court. He was sentenced to five months in jail [and] three years’ probation for falsifying a Department of Veterans Affairs claim; his Army discharge record, too. Yes, Jesse McBeth was in the Army. Briefly. 44 days. Before he was washed out of boot camp. MacBeth is not an Army Ranger; he is not a corporal; he never won the Purple Heart; he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to have seen.

    But don’t look for retractions, folks — not from the anti-war left, the anti-military Drive-By Media, or the Arabic websites that spread his lies about our troops. Fiction serves their purposes; the truth, to borrow a phrase, is inconvenient to them.

    [Ed. note: The tipoff to his lack of authenticity was his incorrect wearing of his uniform, which the milbloggers posted about within hours of his interview release. Because of the Geneva Convention, our military is very exact about how each piece of clothing is to be worn.]

    September 26, 2007:

    Rush takes a call from an Army soldier who laments, [W]hat’s funny is they never talk to real soldiers. They pull these soldiers that come up out of the blue and spout to the media,” to which Rush adds: “The phony soldiers.” The caller repeats the phrase and continues with his point. After respectfully letting him finish, Rush explains for those in the audience the phenomenon of “phony soldiers” like Jesse MacBeth, a darling of the anti-war left exposed as a total fraud who never served and never was in iraq.

    Remeber, MacBeth was tossed out of boot camp after 44 days. But the Left considered him the Absolute Moral Authority when his interview aired. He is a proven fraud.

    Limbaugh posted transcripts of the show (as he does every day) on his website, he invited Harry Reid to come on the show (Reid declined.) Keep this in mind as we review Dingy Harry Reid’s statements. He says this:

    …Rush Limbaugh’s recent characterization of troops who oppose the war as “phony soldiers” is such an outrage.

    Our troops are fighting and dying to bring to others the freedoms that many take for granted. It is unconscionable that Mr. Limbaugh would criticize them for exercising the fundamentally American right to free speech. Mr. Limbaugh has made outrageous remarks before, but this affront to our soldiers is beyond the pale.

    ….it is clear that Mr. Limbaugh’s insult is directed at thousands of American service members.

    Thousands of active troops and veterans were subjected to Mr. Limbaugh’s unpatriotic and indefensible comments on your broadcast. We trust you will agree that not a single one of our sons, daughters, neighbors and friends serving overseas is a “phony soldier.” We call on you to publicly repudiate these comments that call into question their service and sacrifice and to ask Mr. Limbaugh to apologize for his comments.

    Then says this:

    Madam President, early this month I came to the floor to discuss some comments made by Rush Limbaugh. Following my remarks, more than 40 of my Senate collegues and I co-signed a letter to the chairman of Clear Channel, Mark May, TELLING HIM THAT WE WANTED HIM TO CONFER WITH RUSH LIMBAUGH REGARDING THE } STATEMENTS HE MADE. I’VE SINCE SPOKEN TO MARK MAY ABOUT THIS. MARK MAY, IN FACT, CALLED ME REGARDING THIS LETTER. This week, Rush Limbaugh put the origial copy of that letter up for auction on eBay. MR. PRESIDENT, WE DIDN’T HAVE TIME, OR WE COULD HAVE GOTTEN EVERY SENATOR TO SIGN THAT LETTER.

    Admit it, blah: Reid and the Dems got p3wnd.

    Paul (d71395)

  107. Limbaugh cut the tape kiddo.
    read

    “Summary: In response to Media Matters’ documentation of his recent description of service members who advocate U.S. withdrawal from Iraq as “phony soldiers,” Rush Limbaugh claimed that he had not been talking “about the anti-war movement generally,” but rather “about one soldier … Jesse MacBeth.” Limbaugh then purported to air the “entire” segment in question. In fact, the clip he aired omitted a full 1 minute and 35 seconds of discussion that occurred between Limbaugh’s original “phony soldiers” comment and his subsequent reference to MacBeth.”

    blah (7b03e4)

  108. Limbaugh cut the tape kiddo.

    Oh yeah. Like Media Matters is gonna tell the truth. Come up with a different source, or all you’ve done here is prove you are an idiot or a liar. I vote for both.

    Paul (d71395)

  109. All right, blah, what’s relevant about the edit? You see, what was edited wasn’t relevant to the discussion. Where’s the red meat?

    [begin Limbaugh edit]

    LIMBAUGH: — know where you’re going these days, the last four years, if you signed up. The odds are you’re going there or Afghanistan or somewhere.

    CALLER 2: Exactly, sir. And, and my other comment was — and the reason I was calling for — was to report to Jill about the fact that we didn’t, didn’t find any weapons of mass destruction. Actually, we have found weapons of mass destruction in chemical agents that [inaudible] been using against us for awhile now.

    I’ve done two tours in Iraq. I just got back in June and there were many instances of — since [inaudible] not know what they’re using in their IEDs [improvised explosive devices]. They’re using mustard artillery rounds. The VX artillery rounds in their IEDs.

    Because they didn’t know what they were using, they didn’t do it right, and so it just kind of — it, it didn’t really hurt anybody but there are — those munitions are over there, it’s just — it’s a huge desert. If they’ve buried it somewhere, we’re never gonna find it.

    LIMBAUGH: Well, you know, that’s a moot point for me right now —

    MIKE: Rush —

    LIMBAUGH: — the weapons of mass destruction. We gotta get beyond that. We’re, we’re there. What — who cares if, if — we all know they were there and, and Mahmoud [Ahmadinejad, Iranian president] even admitted it in one of his speeches here about — talkin’ about Saddam using the poison mustard gas or whatever it is on his own people — but that, that’s moot, right? What, what’s more important is all this is taking place now in the midst of the surge working.

    And all of these anti-war Democrats are getting even more hell-bent on pulling out of there, which means that success on the part of you and, and your colleagues over there is, is a great threat to them.

    [end Limbaugh edit]

    Media Matters lied by telling the truth. They claimed that the tape was edited, hoping that idiots like you would say “Gotcha!” without reading the text.

    Next time, link to a different source…and one that actually has a smoking gun.

    Paul (d71395)

  110. And blah…how about responding to the exit question: Rush matched the $2.1 million purchase price of the letter. Where is the Dems $2.1 million matching contribution?

    Paul (d71395)

  111. One more thing, blah…since you condemn Limbaugh for talking about several different subjects during the course of a conversation with a caller, and claim that all of it is one subject (phony soldiers), why aren’t you condemning leftist trolls for the same?

    Paul (d71395)

  112. You don’t understand, Paul. There’s a narrative to be pushed.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  113. Actually Chaos, I do understand. There’s a narrative to be crushed.

    Paul (d71395)

  114. Paul – I think blah handle stands for:

    Big Lying AssHole

    or

    Big Liberal AssHole

    Pick ’em

    daleyrocks (906622)

  115. blah? blah?

    Where did blah go?

    Must have already put in his 8 hours for MoveOn. He’s off the clock now.

    wls (fb8809)

  116. Don’t forget fake but accurate Paul.

    chaos (9c54c6)

  117. WLS #114: darn it, you stole my idea!

    Chaos #115: Let me rephrase my statement:

    There’s a ‘fake, but accurate’ narrative to be crushed.

    Paul (d71395)

  118. I didn’t realize that Rush called any Republican who was against the Iraq war a “phony Republican” during the “phony soldier” segment:

    CALLER: Are we ever going to take care of it, though? How long do you think we’re going to have to be there to take care of it?

    RUSH: Mike, you can’t possibly be a Republican.

    CALLER: I am.

    RUSH: You can’t be Republican.

    CALLER: Oh, I am definitely Republican.

    RUSH: You sound just like a Democrat.

    CALLER: No, but seriously, Rush, how long do we have to stay there?

    alphie (99bc18)

  119. Alphie #117 –

    You missed the next part, which I find pretty interesting:

    RUSH: As long as it takes.

    CALLER: How long?

    RUSH: As long as it takes. It is very serious. This is the United States of America at war with Islamofascists. Just like your job, you do everything you have to do, whatever it takes to get it done, if you take it seriously.

    CALLER: So then you say we need to stay there forever?

    RUSH: No, Bill — (Laughing) or Mike. I’m sorry. I’m confusing you with the guy from Texas.

    CALLER: I used to be military, okay, and I am a Republican.

    RUSH: Yeah.

    CALLER: And I do listen to you, but –

    RUSH: Right, I know. And I, by the way, used to walk on the moon.

    CALLER: How long do we have to stay there?

    RUSH: You’re not listening to what I say. You can’t possibly be a Republican. I’m answering every question; it’s not what you want to hear, and so it’s not even penetrating your little wall of armor you’ve got built up. I said we stay to get the job done, as long as it takes. I didn’t say forever. Nothing takes forever. That’s not possible, Bill. Mike. Whatever. Nobody lives forever, no situation lasts forever, everything ends. We determine how do we want it to end, in our favor or in our defeat? With people like you in charge, who want to put a timeline on everything — do you ever get anything done in your life? Or do you say, “Well, I wanted to have this done by now, and it’s not, so screw it”? You don’t live your life that way. Well, hell, you might, I don’t know. But the limitations that you want to impose here are senseless, and they, frankly, portray no evidence that you are a Republican.

    Itsme (871b28)

  120. Staunch Brayer, the caller, Mike, is your kind of Republican: fake but accurate.

    No wonder you quoted him.

    Staunch Brayer, once again you are like the defensive end that does a sack dance after sacking the backup QB and taunts the backup offensive tackle while his own team is losing 75-0 with 1:30 left in the fourth quarter after a severe record-setting thrashing by the first-string offense.

    Still pure comedy gold.

    Paul (d71395)

  121. Guess we have a battle coming up for control of the Republican party, Paul…dittoheads vs. reality based.

    Should be fun.

    alphie (99bc18)

  122. Guess we have a battle coming up for control of the Republican party, Paul…dittoheads vs. reality based.

    Wrong party, Staunch Brayer…the “reality-based” crowd are Dems.

    Paul (d71395)

  123. So when are you gonna answer my question, Staunch Brayer: why doesn’t any (or all, by pooling resources)of the rich Dems that signed the letter match the contribution like Rush did?

    I’m still waiting for your answer.

    Paul (d71395)

  124. Haha, paul,

    Why should the Dems donate to the same charities that wingnut blowhards do?

    alphie (99bc18)

  125. Paul #122:

    Why didn’t any or all GOP members match the contribution?

    Itsme (871b28)

  126. I asked first.

    Paul (d71395)

  127. Nice, Paul.

    The Dems haven’t donaed to the charity because they don’t take orders from a guy who sat out Vietnam because of butt warts.

    Good enough.

    Now, can you tell me why you thnk the Dems should take orders from a drug addict?

    alphie (99bc18)

  128. Now, can you tell me why you thnk the Dems should take orders from a drug addict?

    Oh, I didn’t know Hillary was a drug addict.

    Paul (d71395)

  129. Paul:

    I think Alpho was referring to himself and Itsfoul.

    Thomas Jackson (bf83e0)

  130. One thing everybody can bet on, you’re never see the patriots of the Left doing anything that matches Rush’s efforts for the troops.

    Can we question their patriotism now? (To the USA not to the world socialist movement)

    Thomas Jackson (bf83e0)

  131. The Dems haven’t donaed to the charity because they don’t take orders from a guy who sat out Vietnam because of butt warts.

    Funny. Harry seemed to think it was a great-enough charity when he was talking at noon yesterday. If it’s worth praising on the floor of the senate, why wouldn’t he donate?

    And the Dems were challenged because they were the ones who signed the letter. I didn’t see many Republicans on those three sheets of signatures.

    Rush challenged them to match him over something they obviously believed enough in to put their signature to. Why are they unable to then match that with a charitable donation?

    And why are you so violent when confrunted with further proof that conservitives consistantly out-donate liberals?

    And as for “fake-republicans”, you obviously ever listen to Rush’s show. Quite often he gets someone who is in fact liberal, but claims to be a conservitive to try and add credability to the talking points they are about to read off of Kos or Media Matters. The code phrase we’ve come to associate with them is “I [almost] always agree with you Rush, but on this you’re wrong” or words to that effect.

    Those are “fake republicans” because they aren’t, in fact, republicans at all. Just like “phony soldiers” were never actual soldiers (or never did what they claim they did, like that air-force chick who was “raped while stationed in Iraq” without ever having actually been to Iraq).

    Republicans, the VAST majority of them at any rate, understand that to set a 100% firm date on withdrawl is to set ourselves up for a “surprise” when things get quiet until we leave, and then explode upon departure.

    If the cops say “we’ll only be looking for drunk drivers until 2am”, and you have some odd desire to drive while smashed, you’ll wait till after 2am to turn the keys and take off. Does that make any sense?

    Most republicans understand the concept of follow-through.

    And as for “taking orders” from someone who “sat out Vietnam because of butt warts”, the Dems sure didn’t seem to have a problem taking orders from a guy that spent part of Vietnam in Moscow… So why not sit your rightous indignation aside, and be realistic, ok?

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  132. Scott #130:

    If it’s worth praising on the floor of the senate, why wouldn’t he donate?

    Well to be fair, it wouldn’t be a simple “donation.” It would require exceeding a $2+ million bid. Same with a match.

    Itsme (871b28)

  133. Why didn’t any or all GOP members match the contribution?

    Because they’re not the ones attempting to claim credit for an effort that backfired on them.

    If Harry Reid had simply apologized yesterday, or kept his mouth shut, I wouldn’t even have asked the question. I asked because he tried to claim credit.

    Paul (d71395)

  134. I see. I assumed you asked because he was encouraging the people who had the means to consider contributing. Which of course would include both parties.

    Itsme (871b28)

  135. It would require exceeding a $2+ million bid.

    True. That’s why I suggested the 42 Dems pool their resources. And such a donation wouldn’t necessarily have to made immediately.

    Paul (d71395)

  136. Which of course would be a pretty silly way for them to try to score a point on a fast-fading issue.

    In my view anyway.

    Itsme (871b28)

  137. I’m pretty sure that given a couple of days, and some cattle futures, Hillary could make a 2.1 millions donation all on her own. 😉

    Kerry’s could come from his wife. *snickers*

    Scott Jacobs (a1de9d)

  138. Apologize for what, Paul?

    The far right seems to believe this “phony soldier” issue is some kind of victory for them.

    As usual, the “victory” is rather hard for normal people to see.

    It looks like Rush is paying some money to charity to apologize for what he said.

    alphie (99bc18)

  139. As usual, the “victory” is rather hard for normal people to see.

    Nah, just obtuse-as-a-one-degree-one-degree-178-degree-triangle people like yourself, Staunch Brayer.

    Paul (d71395)

  140. alphie, you are not a normal person. Do others’ reactions to you leave you with the impression that you are?

    Christoph (92b8f7)

  141. This is entertaining and all, but your continued denials make me question your sanity, Staunch Brayer.

    Paul (d71395)

  142. You guys crack me up.

    Rush’s audience is less than one percent of Amercicans, and I’ll bet most them just have his show on as background noise while they work lonely jobs.

    alphie (99bc18)

  143. Rush’s audience is less than one percent of Amercicans, and I’ll bet most them just have his show on as background noise while they work lonely jobs.

    Yeah, and you’d kill to have that audience.

    In fact, I’ll even quote you from #41 of this thread:

    I kinda admire people who make it.

    Kudos to Rush.

    Heh.

    Paul (d71395)

  144. What a stunning rebuke to the dhimmierats and their agenda. Mainstream America recognizes what things like Alpho and Itsatroll are. Their leaders have sunk to an 11% approval, about a third of the presidents. Its looking like a 1972 blowout in 2008. Those 30 odd dhimmierats that were elected because they pretended to be conservative in red districts or swing districts now have to explain their extremist positions. They’re toast.

    Thomas Jackson (bf83e0)

  145. How else can you describe Harry Reid other than to call him a liar? Just call him a Democrat; the words mean the same thing.

    Dana (556f76)

  146. I have just received an anonymous e-mail with a link to a site, I Call BS, that purports to have a secret recording of Harry Reid’s Secretary from Friday morning. You can listen to the mp3 and judge for yourself. It seems authentic to me.

    Some one should tell Rush.

    M. Simon (d55893)

  147. Harry Reid law firm he is a sharholder in Lionel, Sawyer and Collins.

    Look on AOL for Harry Reid, Shelly Berkley and Rabbi Harlig, Michael Segelstein.

    His law firm protects convictive sex offenders and for silences they lock minors in law office to get victim to back down. When that does not work sue the victim of the sex crime and donate to the Judge in the case then make the victim pay.

    That is how Harry Reid makes money on the side.

    Justice (0fba43)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5117 secs.