Via Andrew Sullivan, Rush Limbaugh is again suggesting that Democrats want to lose the war in Iraq and the war on terror and are on the side of Osama bin Laden:
You look at the Democrat Party, look at their leaders and how they are trying to secure defeat in Iraq and secure defeat in the war on terror.
...You know, how do we know which side John Kerry is on in this war, folks? In the last war, Vietnam, he was with the enemy. He met with them. He lied for them before a Senate committee, and now here we have Senator Kerry downplaying the enemy's role in slaughtering Iraqis and downplaying their danger! We're the problem -- once again. So whose side is he on here? He's being very consistent, ladies and gentlemen. I'll tell you something else. This is absolutely hilarious. "Mr. Bin Laden's group" is how the New York Times refers to Al-Qaeda! (Lauging.) Why don't they just say, "Osama bin Laden, D-Afghanistan"? (Laughing.) Mr. Bin Laden's group? Osama bin Laden, D-Afghanistan. (Laughing.) Democrat, Afghanistan. Like Congressman William Jefferson (Democrat-Louisiana).
...On whose side is Senator Kennedy? Folks, I'm telling you, these people treating this not as a US national security issue. They're arguing with President Bush about that.
On Limbaugh's site, the transcript is accompanied by this graphic:
Meanwhile, Defense Secretary Robert Gates repudiated Undersecretary of Defense Eric Edelman's loathsome attack on Hillary Clinton as aiding enemy propaganda, but annoyingly reserved the right to smear dissent in the future:
I emphatically assure you that we do not claim, suggest or otherwise believe that Congressional oversight emboldens our enemies, nor do we question anyone’s motives in this regard. My statements to this effect have been frequent and unambiguous. That said, we all recognize that there are multiple audiences for what we say, and need to be careful not to undermine the morale of our troops or encourage our enemies — the point I think Ambassador Edelman was trying to make in his letter.
(For more, see our coverage at Spinsanity on Limbaugh and attacks on dissent and my blog posts on Limbaugh and attacks on dissent.)
I take it "Eric Edelman's loathsome attack on Hillary Clinton" refers to the statement in Edelman's private letter to Senator Clinton that Senator Clinton chose to release to the media? The tree fell in the forest, but it didn't become an "attack" until Senator Clinton made it one. One can't help wondering, why is Senator Clinton questioning Senator Clinton's patriotism?
Posted by: Rob | July 30, 2007 at 10:09 AM