October 19, 2007

Government Produces Something Worthwhile

Would you happen to have a couple of million dollars in loose change around the house? If you do, you could own the letter that Harry Reid sent to Rush Limbaugh, accusing the radio host of smearing American troops. Rush has the letter up for auction at e-Bay, and with less than six hours to go, the bid is now topping $2.1 million. Not only that, Rush has pledged the proceeds to the Marine Corps - Law Enforcement Foundation -- and has pledged to match the final bid himself.

Once again, Reid's machinations backfired. He and the 40 Senate Democrats who signed the letter set themselves up as defenders of the military, including Dick Durbin, who once compared the troops to Nazis and Soviets. Now Rush has challenged the 41 to do as he will and match the figure to a foundation that offers scholarships to the children of Marines and police killed in the line of duty. It's called putting one's money where one's mouth is, and I suspect that Rush will be the only one who actually does it.

On the other hand, Rush has singlehandedly helped Reid produce the most valuable item in his life. In fact, it's the most valuable article entirely produced by government of its own accord in memory.


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Comments (55)

Posted by mrlynn | October 19, 2007 6:50 AM

It is sad that the leadership of the United States Senate has become so small, petty, and mean of spirit. Rush, on the other hand, is a class act, and points up the difference with considerable elan. The auction (thanks to the Clear Channel CEO who donated the letter) is a master stroke.


/Mr Lynn

Posted by Lowly Knave | October 19, 2007 6:52 AM

Congressman Pete Stark needs to be asked to match the bid, as well. Let's see just how much he supports the military and their children.

Posted by Christoph | October 19, 2007 6:56 AM

Captain Ed, hear, hear!

Posted by Phill Hallam-Baker | October 19, 2007 7:18 AM

Strange what passes for a class act on the right. Calling active service troops he disagrees with 'phony soldiers' then making up a fake tape with 1 minute 35 seconds cut out to make it look like he didn't does not pass as a 'class act' anywhere else.

Still, we can consider the $2.1 million matching bid as the equivalent of paying a fine. If that is Rush is actually going to pay. He lied about the tape, claiming that he was broadcasting the whole thing when he must have been told that it had been edited. I see no reason to believe a proven liar.

As for small petty and mean, well that sums up Rush and his supporters.

Posted by The Yell | October 19, 2007 7:21 AM

"As for small petty and mean, well that sums up Rush and his supporters."

Quite true. For instance, a bigger man than I would pass over the fact that you're a liar.

Not petty little me. You're a liar.

Posted by Otter | October 19, 2007 7:30 AM

I second Yell.

Posted by DaveD | October 19, 2007 7:30 AM

OK Phill,
Let's say you're correct (even though you are indeed wrong) and Rush is a liar. He is no more a liar than any of your darlings in Washington. Yet look what he does! Raises money with the help of the US government without creating a new bureaucracy to administer it! Pretty innovative. Do you believe Hillary when she says she can do this with health care????

Posted by Jeff from Mpls | October 19, 2007 7:31 AM

The bid is over $2 million this morning for the Harry Ried democrat party smear letter.

If I were a member of the democrat party, I'd feel like complete crap today.

Posted by right4us | October 19, 2007 7:41 AM

"If I were a member of the democrat party, I'd feel like crap" - everyday.

Posted by Keemo | October 19, 2007 7:41 AM

Phill is simply another very angry Liberal who just watched as his leaders have been out smarted & out classed by a civilian man that is admired and loved by most every member of our military, as well as millions of fellow citizens across this great nation. The "Crush Rush" campaign has been a huge failure, with members of Congress taking up valuable floor time attacking a civilian over his right to free speech. Is it any wonder why Americans have little faith "trust" in our government.

Brilliant move Rush!

Posted by NoDonkey | October 19, 2007 7:43 AM

I'm proud to listen to Rush.

He's entertaining, he's informative, he's interesting.

But best of all, the lunatic left hates him.

Can't have a more worthy enemy than the lunatic left. What kind of person would want to be in their good graces.

Rush Limbaugh - Public Servant.

Harry Reid - The lunatic left's pet rodent.

Posted by rbj | October 19, 2007 7:57 AM

No Phill, claiming you are an army ranger when you washed out of boot camp, a la Jesse Macbeth, is lying.
Claiming you saw soldiers running over dogs or wearing skulls under your helmet (both of which were impossible) a la Scott Thomas Beauchamp is lying.
Calling these guys phony soldiers because of their lies is not lying. It's an opinion.

Posted by Greg Toombs | October 19, 2007 7:58 AM

re: 'Democrats feeling like crap'

Liberals have all kinds of feelings. They base their politics and solutions on 'feelings'.

Except when it comes to introspection. They are incapable of it. I doubt they feel shame, or 'like crap', over this.

Of terms that might be applied to their psychological analysis, I think 'projection' and 'transference' would be appropriate for Liberals these days.

Posted by JAZ | October 19, 2007 8:05 AM

Rush raised $2 million in just 7 days and is willing to match the $2 mil in the free market for the Marines and Firemen.

Rush should now challenge Hillary and Barak, "the representatives of the people" to each take just $7 mil each from their $70 mil campaign hordes and have their backers match the money and pay for the $35 mill Schip expansion. Bill Clinton claims to have raised hundreds of millions for his GHI project. He can broker the donations.

If Hill, Bill and Barak truly care about the children then they, and their donors, like Rush should be called upon to put their money wher their mouths are.

Posted by Looking Glass | October 19, 2007 8:09 AM

There's been some questions raised on LGF about prior validation of the bidders. Here's a portion of an email crazytraveler posted.

This is a thank you to each and everyone who took the time to fill out the form to bid on the very special auction Rush had us list.

It has now surpassed $2 million. We have actually removed everyone but a few people who are still serious players in the bidding. If you were notified by us that you could bid, please note that unless you placed a bid successfully over $150,000, your approval is no longer valid. Given the $2 million level, we are requiring many additional items such as bank statements, deposits, signed and faxed forms, copy of your IDs, as well as other proof of income.

So the money looks like a lock. This is also getting seriously strange. Great, but strange. $2 million?

In any case, way to go Rush!

Posted by mike | October 19, 2007 8:13 AM

I think this move by Rush is on of those brilliant and media-savy things I’ve seen in many years. But as to how it plays in the final outcome of the fairness doctrine issue, there is something to consider. In the public arena it is or will soon become obvious the the Dems that they just are not able to survive a game of whack-a-mole with a smart mole. They will be forced to change tactics and go stealth to get talk radio out of their hair. This e-bay auction will make them look foolish for a few days, and then watch for them to become even more desperate and thus dangerous as they try to destroy anyone and any industry or institution that has the brass to speak real truth to their desired power. And Phil, you’re nuts.

Posted by Phill Hallam-Baker | October 19, 2007 8:14 AM

Well, calling people a liar on facts that are verifiable is not merely libel, its stupid.

Rush does not seem to have the transcripts of his show on his Web site, which is a pity. So the only source I can find is the Media Matters transcript. This is of course hardly an unbiased source, and Brock admits being a falsifier for the Republican part in the past, but we can be pretty sure that Rush's people would have put out a rebuttal if they could provide hard evidence the claim is untrue.

The transcript starts: "LIMBAUGH: I was not talking, as Contessa Brewer said here, about the anti-war movement generally. I was talking about one soldier with that "phony soldier" comment, Jesse MacBeth. They had exactly what I'm going to play for you. This is Michael J. Fox all over again. Media Matters had the transcript, but they selectively choose what they want to make their point. Here is -- it runs about 3 minutes and 13 seconds -- the entire transcript, in context, that led to this so-called controversy."

What follows is a transcript with a 1 minute 35 second clip removed. It is hard to see how this can be faked since they have the original audio and it is most certainly Rush's voice.

Politicians do not behave this way. Not on the right, not on the left. Or rather, if they do behave this way they pretty soon become ex politicians. Joe Biden lost his first bid for the Democratic nomination after plagarising Neil Kinnock, which was fair. Since then the level of examination has become ridiculous. Rush can get away with doing this day in, day out only because he is widely considered a buffoon.

Rush only mentioned MacBeth 1 minute and 50 seconds after the phony soldiers comment and in a separate context. 1 minute and 50 seconds is about the time I would guess it takes a studio producer to realize that Rush has put his foot in it and tell him to cover it pronto. The original context makes very clear that the people Rush was calling phony soldiers were the active duty soldiers who happen to disagree with him.

I have posted links to support my claims, where is the support for your assertions? I posted a longer rebuttal on my own blog earlier.

Posted by JLawson | October 19, 2007 8:17 AM

I haven't listened to Rush in years, and what he's done with this letter won't change things - but after the 'phony soldiers' flap I took a look at the transcript of his speech, and it was pretty damn clear he was referring to the posers like Jesse Mcbeth, NOT the soldiers who disagreed with US policy in Iraq.

But that doesn't really matter, does it? All that's important is the spin, and the left has been spinning this issue as hard as they could to try to deflect attention from their own stupidly inept support of the MoveOn Betray-us ad.

If you've got to dig real hard and take TWO WORDS completely out of context, and ignore completely everything ELSE Rush has done for the troops over the years (while I would be quite surprised to find MoveOn giving ANY money to ANY charity that might benefit soldiers) then you've changed from being a mere critic to a calculating liar.

Now, I'll take it as a given that all politicians are liars of some form or another. But in this case, where the lie is intentionally designed to silence someone who is critical of antiwar efforts should make you wonder - would you REALLY want someone in control of the US Senate or House (or the Presidency) who would attempt such a vile form of censorship through character assasination?

Is that the sort of government you want, where you DARE not disagree? (And spare me the hyperventilating scare stories about how free speech as been stifled in the US - I don't see it. What I DO see is a time and state in our culture where ridiculous statements aren't going unchallenged, which is NOT the same thing.) What Reid tried to do with Rush was censor him, stifle his freedom of speech, with the full force and authority of his position - and he was completely and utterly in the wrong in the attempt to do so.


Posted by Labamigo | October 19, 2007 8:19 AM

I'm not sure this will play out the way Rush thinks it will.

Depends on who is the winning bidder.

What if it turns out to be George Soros, and he gladly matches RL's donation and says RL is acting out of guilt for what he said about the soldiers.

Don't count your chickens yet . . .

Posted by NoDonkey | October 19, 2007 8:24 AM

If the anti-freedom, anti-American buffoons in the Democrat Congress bring back the "Fairness Doctrine". Rush will go to satellite radio. Buy stock, because the sales will skyrocket.

He won't suffer.

Unfortunately, lower income people will not be able to hear his show. His optimistic message about America and the opportunity that people have hear if they work at it, won't be heard.

But that's exactly what the left wants. The left works every day to tell poor people that this country is rotten, that poor people have no chance, that poor people are pathetic losers and that their only way they can survive is on Democrat handouts.

Leftism is a cancer that feeds on body politic.

Posted by docjim505 | October 19, 2007 8:40 AM

In between chuckles, giggles, and outright guffaws at how Rush is breaking it off in Dingy Harry and his filthy crew, I wonder how the dems will try to spin their way out of it. Granted, kool-aid drinkers like Phill Hallam-Baker don't require any explanations of why the dems, who just LOOOOOOVE the troops, won't match Rush's contributions, but other people just might.

If anybody here actually watches or reads the MSM, are they bothering to talk about this? Or do they know a beat-down when they see it and are (as usual) covering for their politicians by NOT covering the story?

The only thing that would make this story even better is if Rush took out an ad in the NYT (getting, of course, the same sweetheart rates that moveon.org originally did for their Petraeus smear) challenging the dems to match his contributions. Hard for them (or the MSM) to ignore that.

Posted by right4us | October 19, 2007 8:42 AM

In considering if Soros, or someone similar is bidding? I wondered about this, too. Then dismissed it from the point of - it would fry Soros's brain to have to give money, esp. millions (even though that is poctet change to him) to the military. That would be like a vampire seeing sunlight - to coin a comparison.

Posted by Rovin | October 19, 2007 8:43 AM

"If Hill, Bill and Barak truly care about the children then they, and their donors, like Rush should be called upon to put their money where their mouths are."

Jaz, you're not serious? These three you've mentioned above think it's the governments responsibility to expand this program to shift already covered children to the government dole.

And using children to promote their socialist agenda is from an old democratic playbook going back to a previous Clinton administration.

The ideology's that clash here are the classic difference where private funding (Such as Rush's) for a nobel cause, vs. another welfare meantality that forces another government dependency.

Posted by AnonymousDrivel | October 19, 2007 8:52 AM

RE: Labamigo (October 19, 2007 8:19 AM)

Soros will not be a bidder. Perhaps someone else on the Left who might want to introduce his own spin, but not Soros.

First, the dollar amount early on was too inconsequential for Soros-type money to be involved. He needed not partake in the exercise. Once the bidding reached high enough levels, the group of bidders was closed - restricted only to those who had been competing earlier. It's very unlikely Soros would have been involved.

Second, Soros does not want to agitate the sycophants doing his bidding. Make no mistake, the prospect of money from the farthest Left going into a Rush project or going to the "illegal warring troops" would send them into a tizzy. Soros might lose support from the extreme that does so much work for him, and that's credibility Soros needs to maintain his army. Yes, other finance could be tossed their way to buy a bit more allegiance to counteract an unpopular bid, but that seems terribly unlikely.

Third, Soros cannot be seen as an agitator working both sides of this ideological battle. While he may want political instability (and subsequent economic ones, too), he probably wouldn't want everyone to know he wants instability. His sycophants operate on ideology and Soros would lose some credibility in their camp. Others would note how he works the system giving money to both sides of the fight to stir up conflict. That's a risky move that could marginalize his efforts among the greater population.

Soros won't invest efforts here in spite of ridiculously deep pockets.

Rush's brainstorm is a marketing coup. 1) He provides his own material that fills up hours of airtime, 2) he sets a precedent that will be remembered like an advertising jingle due to its novelty, 3) he'll be able to tweak the Democrats (again) and parlay that into his anti-Fairness Doctrine message that is sure to become louder, and 4) he gets to exploit the free external coverage of his gambit as a giant advertising campaign whereby he'll pay the fees to a cause he loves rather than yet another advertising firm billing at high rates.

Rush turned Reid's lemon into high-calorie lemonade. It's all so rich.

Posted by johnnycab23513 | October 19, 2007 8:56 AM

Actually, the right of free speech has effectively been taken from the left. Whenever one of their absurd statements is answered with intelligent response and facts, the immediate response is "You people hate _____!!! (insert key word of the day from Democrat talking points as reported in Kos.). When one lacks the ability to engage in a debate with intelligent speech and using actual ideas instead of phrases found in the comics that bubble gum is wrapped in, they have limited their own right to free speech.

Posted by Phill Hallam-Baker | October 19, 2007 9:02 AM

I find it notable that not a single one of the comments in this thread actually addresses the factual issue of whether Rush lied when he claimed to provide the complete transcript and then presented a tendentiously edited substitute.

The definition of drinking the kool-aid is when you ignore startements of fact that disagree with your ideological bias. In this case the question of whether Rush lied about editing the tape is pretty easy to check out. Yet not a single one of the posters in this thread has done so.

I think the reason is pretty obvious, you are cowards. You simply don't dare to put your ideological world view in any situation where it might be challenged by the facts. The facts here are two audio clips, the first the original Rush Limbaugh show and the second the show in which Rush claimed to present an unedited version of the first and then did not.

Instead Rush played you all for fools. He has your number, he thinks that you are all just like those idiot fellow travelling fools in the 30s who first supported US intervention in Europe against the NAZIs, then when the Soviet's sgreed to the von Ribentrop pact were against and then flipped a second time after operation Barbarossa. Rush knows that he can feed you any excuse, any lie and you will accept it because the alternative is simply too horrible to think.

It's like the folk who get caught in one of those Nigerian letter scams. The mark is persuaded to part with a few hundred dollars, then a few hundred more, then a thousand, then some more. Pretty soon they are so heavily invested that they simply cannot believe that they have been conned. In fact some of the victims still don't believe that they have been had after they have been arrested for embezzling from their employer to pay the con-men.

I don't actually care about Rush, as a partisan liberal I know that today Rush is far more valuable to our side. What I am actually interested in is how to persuade people not to pay the scammers in the 419 advance fee fraud schemes. So far not a single one of you has followed the link I gave so that you can check up. Instead you simply throw out naked assertions about facts which are easily checked and would be proved wrong if you did.

Posted by Jeff from Mpls | October 19, 2007 9:03 AM

If a hard-leftist spends $2 million on the Harry Ried (D) smear letter, I'd still be happy.

Granted, you shouldn't have to trick a lib into supporting the troops; support should come naturally out of gratitude. Still we'll take a lib's money, even if given out of hatred.

Posted by Keemo | October 19, 2007 9:04 AM

If you missed the Rush segment on H&C last night; go to Foxnews.com and click on the appropriate link. Rush absolutely nailed it...

Posted by itsspideyman | October 19, 2007 9:05 AM

Labamigo, even if Soros or the Dems are behind it, so what? I understand you think that Rush will be made to look small by this but I think he has his bases covered.

He can say that he made the Dems spend 2 million dollars in a petty and spiteful act that can't dent him in the least. He can say that all that money goes to the Marine Scholorship Fund, and that any time he wants to he can tweak a reaction out of them to get more. I bet he starts calling on them to do it again, because the Fund needs the money!

He's got them chased into a corner, and I bet they are wishing he would just go away. Like Rush has said before; in their dreams!

Posted by Justrand | October 19, 2007 9:07 AM

If it wasn't for Pete Stark (D-Anus), Harry Reid would look like the stooopidest and most worthless sumbitch on the planet!!

Mind you, it's not like Harry isn't TRYING!

Rock on, Rush...rock on! (p.s. I'm gonna become a regular Rush listener from now on!)

Posted by obladioblada | October 19, 2007 9:07 AM

Rush is more commonly castigated for being "far right" and blindly patriotic. What's laughable is Dems' accusation that he'd do a 180 and smear the troops.

If you're going to engage in school-yard name-calling, at least have enough imagination to devise a believable story. Drum up allegations that he said something that's actually in character for him. Sheesh!

Posted by Del Dolemonte | October 19, 2007 10:12 AM

Out of curiousity I went to Limbaugh's website and downloaded the letter-he has it there in pdf format. It's absolutely hilarious. Reid actually quotes a "poll" that the Gannett-run "Military Times" ran regarding how the troops feel about the Iraq War.

Unfortunately for Harry, his puppeteers didn't tell him that said "poll" had already been debunked due to its methodology (it was a MAIL poll of former subscribers to the MT).

PS to Phill, thanks for the Friday morning laughs. Brilliant satire!

Posted by anonymous | October 19, 2007 10:34 AM

This event illustrates, in bold relief, the difference between Liberals and Conservatives.

Liberals talk. Endlessly. They preen and prattle on and on about the poor, the disadvantaged, etc., etc. When they act, they always attempt to commandeer someone else’s money to do so.

Conservatives don’t talk, they DO; and they do it with their own dough.

In one week Limbaugh and the bidders have raised more money for charity than all 41 of those pathetic creatures have, -put together, in their entire lives.

The Senators deserve a ‘T’ shirt. “We Lied to Screw Rush Limbaugh and All We Got Was a Good Butt-Thumping”

Posted by newton | October 19, 2007 11:01 AM

Obviously, Phil links to the MM transcript, but never to the primary source - from the horse's mouth, so to speak.

Look Phil, you can call Rush anything you want. It's your First Amendment right. And he's man enough to take it. In fact, he is now proving, two million times over, that he's more man than his pathetic critics. And that includes YOU.

Do me one favor. Just call him whatever you want to his very face. I dare you now. Go for it. I'm waiting.

But I'll tell you what: you will not.

Posted by Del Dolemonte | October 19, 2007 11:21 AM

Phill says:

"I don't actually care about Rush, as a partisan liberal I know that today Rush is far more valuable to our side."


How so? Last time I checked, Limbaugh had an audience many times greater than any radio talker on your side of the aisle. And every time your side has tried to silence him, he's beaten you like a drum. He's doing it again right now.

Posted by The Mechanical Eye | October 19, 2007 11:34 AM

This is so petty its hard to believe.


Posted by Greg Toombs | October 19, 2007 11:39 AM

Geez, Phill, you have a blog? I'm surprised, since you seem sooo un-tech-savvy. You can't find what Rush said anywhere on the internet? Very lame claim.

You want us to do the work for you and provide a spoon-feed? Huh.

To find all you want about what Rush said, and has said since, about phony soldiers, just go to Rush's website and search for 'macbeth'. It's all there.

Perhaps you might consider joining Rush 24/7 so you can watch the archived video?

Go Rush! Long may you speak and broadcast freely.

Posted by Mike | October 19, 2007 11:41 AM

Phill says:

"I don't actually care about Rush, as a partisan liberal I know that today Rush is far more valuable to our side."

Actually as a partisan liberal, you don't know horse sh*t from applesauce, but if you really think Rush is so valuable to your side, why would you want him to be less visible? Or do you think that the Dems in Congress are making a grave mistake trying to shut Rush up?

Posted by Del Dolemonte | October 19, 2007 11:44 AM

Here's an excerpt of a post on this subject over at Mechanical Eye's favorite site, DU:

"But have you notice that Rush is winning the propaganda war? He challenged The Good Guys to match the winning bid to their charity of their choice. And by their not saying anything he’s proven his point.

It’s bad enough we couldn’t tell the difference between a fake soldier who never was in the service with somebody who was. He is milking it for everything he can. And another way he’s winning the propaganda war: The bidding has been going on through the weekend and only now are we finding out about it. Over 200,000 viewers have seen it and only now are we doing anything about it.

Has nobody bothered to “Know your enemy” and bothered to even listen to his show for a few minutes? We are being laughed at by the Wrong Wing!

We need George Soroes to buy the items and destroy them.

If he can keep Air America on the air he should be able to come up with the spare change and win"

By the way, Harry Reid is now desperately trying to take credit for all of the money the eBay auction is raising! Of course, that is the template the media will cover, if they cover this story at all (and so far they haven't, because it makes theur side look like fools)

Posted by patrick neid | October 19, 2007 12:00 PM

and the winning bid---$2,100,100.00

Posted by AnonymousDrivel | October 19, 2007 12:02 PM

RE: Phill Hallam-Baker (October 19, 2007 9:02 AM)

"I don't actually care about Rush, as a partisan liberal I know that today Rush is far more valuable to our side. What I am actually interested in is how to persuade people not to pay the scammers in the 419 advance fee fraud schemes."

Says the commenter in a blog post about Rush using sixteen paragraphs in three separate posts about Rush with a link to a reportedly longer rebuttal to Rush with links of "proof" to refute Rush. That's some mighty extensive not caring.

Naturally, we all appreciate your sincere interest and efforts to protect us from Nigerian 419 scams. Do you have a consular office or mailing address where we can send a check for your consumer protection services?

Posted by SeniorD | October 19, 2007 12:09 PM


You say:

"I find it notable that not a single one of the comments in this thread actually addresses the factual issue of whether Rush lied when he claimed to provide the complete transcript and then presented a tendentiously edited substitute."

If you were to view the transcript from last night's Hannity and Colmes, you could read Rush's explanation. Were you to then visit Rush's 24x7 site, you would see 'Dittocam' footage that backs up his explanation.

As to 'not a single one of the comments actually address[ing] the factual issue...' that is because your specious argument is moot. Go find another dead horse to flog.

Posted by Del Dolemonte | October 19, 2007 12:28 PM

Harry Reid video here:


And here's some info on the winning bidder:


Posted by Mike Morrissey | October 19, 2007 12:29 PM


You said "the letter that Harry Reid sent to Rush Limbaugh". Harry Reid actually sent the letter to Mr Mays, Rush's boss at Clear Channel, who gave it to Rush.

Posted by NoDonkey | October 19, 2007 12:37 PM

That's nice Harry Reid thanked Rush Limbaugh.

Be even nicer if Harry got a crowbar, opened up his wallet and contributed to the Foundation.

After all, being the Mafia's bought and paid for Senator must be netting Reid more than just the money his children are bilking the government for.

Oh, right - the liberal definition of "generosity" is forcing OTHER people to pony up. Liberals typically throw dimes around like manhole covers.

The Foundation will get not a single dime from piker Harry Reid.

Posted by Tom W. | October 19, 2007 12:41 PM

I would've gone to Phil's blog to examine his brilliant and incisive factual analysis of Rush's lies, but I was just too afraid.

Oh, well.

Posted by Lowly Knave | October 19, 2007 12:50 PM

Hey Phill-

Want to comment on Congressman Pete Stark's remarks?

Posted by BB | October 19, 2007 3:10 PM

Nice that Harry Reid thanked Rush, then tried to claim that HE was part of a WE that conceived and executed the auction!

No one's buying that.

Posted by Del Dolemonte | October 19, 2007 3:26 PM

Tom W said

"I would've gone to Phil's blog to examine his brilliant and incisive factual analysis of Rush's lies, but I was just too afraid.

Oh, well."

Not to worry, Tom W, I did the dirty work for you.

Poor Phill's only received one comment on his Limbaugh piece, and that one comment actually refutes the Left's allegations that something "relevant" was edited out of the Rush show's transcript:

"The mysterious 1 minute 35 second edit that the leftists conveniently leave out consisted of the caller, a soldier, trying to change the subject from phony soldiers to missing WMDs. Rush politely dismissed that, ended the call and immediately went back to discuss the MacBeth story."

Phill's blog also continues to beat the dead horse known as Bill Burkett (the Bush National Guard memo guy) by relying on a source at Puffington Host, and elsewhere Phill also liberally quotes former Enron advisor and current resident of Saturn Paul Krugman.

Oh, and one of his best comedy bits is here:


Great entertainment, Phill! Keep up the good work.

Posted by Robert | October 19, 2007 8:11 PM

Rush has done something useful.
Reid should send a letter daily.

Posted by Joshua | October 19, 2007 8:33 PM

This probably is one of the highest amounts ever bid for a government document, but not the highest. In 2000, one copy from the first printing (out of 25 still extant) of the Declaration of Independence sold at auction for $8.14 million.

I do find it bizarre that Harry Reid's letter would be considered 25% as valuable as the Declaration of Independence. 0.01% as valuable would be pushing it.

Posted by unclesmrgol | October 19, 2007 9:10 PM


Do you realize exactly how many fingers point back when you point to the right that way?

You guys have Air America. You guys have the Pacifica Foundation. It's not our fault that Air America is floundering, or that the PF stations have such low listenership. It's your listeners. To be frank, they don't exist.

Trying to make listeners by forcing stations to air your already low-listener viewpoints isn't going to work.

As has often been said, "Never try to teach a pig to sing. It never works, and it just annoys the pig."

Posted by ck | October 19, 2007 9:31 PM

It's sad that ED keeps saying that Rush didn't smear troops who oppose the war. I wouldn't mind it if Ed hadn't made such a big deal out of the moveon ad, but the hypocrisy involved is unbelievable. And yes I heard and read what Rush said. Absolutely pathetic. I don't care that he said it, it's just the damn hypocrisy is beyond pale! You have to be completely partisan to buy Rush's spin on the story --- or maybe you just listened/read Rush's transcript (where he conveniently left out a bunch of stuff...hmmm)...

And now you continue to try and smear Reid for what? For writing a damn letter?! You have to be kidding me!! It's like a goddamn playground here!

Posted by The Yell | October 20, 2007 1:21 AM

"And now you continue to try and smear Reid for what? For writing a damn letter?! You have to be kidding me!! It's like a goddamn playground here!"

Yeah! It's like the time everybody beat up on Nixon for having pals drop by after office hours!

Posted by Cooltom | October 20, 2007 1:54 AM

'he thinks that you are all just like those idiot fellow travelling fools in the 30s who first supported US intervention in Europe against the NAZIs, then when the Soviet's sgreed to the von Ribentrop pact were against and then flipped a second time after operation Barbarossa.'

Uh, PHB, the people you are describing in the above sentence were the American LEFT of the 1930s and 40s.

History seems to really confuse liberals and that's why they tend to -- at best, ignore it, and at worst -- revise it.

Post a comment