Siteadmin, Check users, nsTeam1RO, nsTeam1RW, nsTeam1_talkRO, nsTeam1_talkRW, oversight, Administrators
30,650
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 124:
Line 124: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
my POV on "phony soldiers"
<s>I tried to undo vandalism, but it was spread across two edits. Someone please revert!--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 13:59, 17 July 2007 (EDT)</s>
<s>I tried to undo vandalism, but it was spread across two edits. Someone please revert!--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 13:59, 17 July 2007 (EDT)</s>
:Nevermind. I got it.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 14:03, 17 July 2007 (EDT)
:Nevermind. I got it.--[[User:Autofire|Autofire]] 14:03, 17 July 2007 (EDT)
==Who's phony?==
Based on [http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,298858,00.html this] and other news stories, I'd say that Limbaugh was using the term ''phony'' ambiguously. But there are no grounds to suggest that he mean "all soldiers who oppose US military policy in Iraq".
He apparently had two other meanings in mind, although (unlike yours truly) he's not an expert on clarifying word meanings:
#a phony is a [[ringer]], someone who pretends to be representative of a typical person but has been specially selected, with the hope of swaying public opinion; or,
#a phony is someone who says something he knows to be false (also with the intent of swaying public opinion)
Reid correctly pointed out that Limbaugh used the same term for more than one soldier. But his error lies in concluding that Limbaugh had the entire "anti-war" population of soldiers in mind.
It doesn't make sense for Reid to condemn a remark (especially when it's only two words long, in an unscripted conversation). Now condemning an opinion which a speaker confirms and stands by is another thing. But Limbaugh has repudiated the meaning Reid attributed to him, so what's to condemn?
Only a chimera, an false image constructed for the single purpose of discrediting a man. And it's pretty clear that Reid is not after truth but about making Limbaugh shut up.
Democrats and Republicans should debate the issues; neither side should engage in [[ad hominem]] arguments. --[[User:Ed Poor|Ed Poor]] <sup>[[User talk:Ed Poor|Talk]]</sup> 07:42, 2 October 2007 (EDT)