Showing posts with label Blunder. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Blunder. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 2, 2007

Official Text of Udall's Resolution

The official text of the Mark Udall, (D) MoveOn.org, resolution against Rush Limbaugh appears on the Library of Congress site.

The list of original co-sponsors is also at that site. He couldn't even get Diana DeGette to sign on, which shows just how far out this resolution is ("where the buses don't run" as Brit Hume said about MoveOn.org on Sunday).

Not surprisingly, Mark Udall's ally in trying to establish a department of peace in the President's cabinet (no kidding), Dennis Kucinich, is on the list.

Mark Udall Update: Resolution Introduced Late Monday Night

Looks like Mark Udall finally followed through on his promise to introduce a resolution condemning Rush Limbaugh:
U.S. Rep. Mark Udall offered legislation Monday condemning talk-show host Rush Limbaugh for remarks he made about "phony soldiers."

"Congress should make clear that Mr. Limbaugh's use of the term 'phony soldiers' is beneath contempt," Udall said.
. . .
Udall's resolution, introduced Monday night, says that Congress condemns "the personal attacks made by the broadcaster Rush impugning the integrity and professionalism of Americans serving in the Armed Forces."

There were 19 co-sponsors Monday night. None were from Colorado.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., asked other senators to sign a letter of censure.
This will make a nice campaign ad next year, as Udall's attempt to placate his left flank by politicizing the military in a cheap use of a phony smear only reveals his truly immoderate positions.

The only thing "beneath contempt" is the political grandstanding by Udall and other Democrats based on a debunked "scandal".

As pointed out over at Schaffer v Udall, is the would-be Senator simply groveling to the MoveOn crowd and throwing them a bone--and thus moving further to the left and out of Ken Salazar and Bill Ritter's "middle-of-the-road" moderate Democrat positioning, while not actually enjoying any accolades (indeed being criticized and opposed for his "meaningless resolution") from his supposed supporters?

More at Slapstick Politics, including earlier pre-resolution analysis.

Monday, October 1, 2007

A Change in Strategy and Messenger

It looks like the Senate Democrats aren't quite as anxious as Mark Udall to put Republicans on record as wanting to politicize the military. Now, Harry Reid is asking them to voluntarily sign a letter to the President of Clear Channel condemning Rush Limbaugh.


“On Friday, many Democrats joined me in drafting a letter to the Chief Executive Officer of Clear Channel, Mark Mays that we will send out this week.


Oh, Friday, eh? The same day Mark Udall was peddling his embarrassing draft.

Reid's letter tries to make the point that Udall made without putting Congress on record as politicizing the military:


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.


One wonders if this language suggests that Harry "The War is Lost" Reid and his band of merry Senate Democrats have now come around to the position that American soldiers should be "fighting and dying to bring to others the freedoms that many take for granted." Hopefully, someone will ask Mark Udall and Harry Reid if they now favor the war and its goals or if these are just more empty words from empty suits.

If they are the latter, they only embarrass themselves further.

Phantom Resolution?

As this is written it is almost 4 pm in Washington. We are yet to see evidence that Mark Udall has actually submitted the resolution he imprudently announced he would introduce today. His official site says nothing. Care to bet that he is having second thoughts?

The left wing blogs, which were cheering for this last Friday seem to have fallen silent. There are two probable reasons for this: 1) it was based on a fraudulent charge, and 2) even the left is unwilling to risk seeing the military politicized for a short term and probably illusive gain.

Ben DeGrow observes on Mount Vitus that the incident will cost Udall respect. What Ben doesn't say is that a failure to introduce this might cost him dearly among the MoveOn.org crowd. He has put himself between a rock and a hard place.

Sunday, September 30, 2007

Michelle Malkin Writes About Mark Udall's Blunder

Rush Limbaugh, phony soldiers, and the Left’s desperate need for its own “Betray Us” moment

Asks [ ABC News' Brian ] Maloney: “Given the overwhelming evidence to support Limbaugh’s contention that he really was talking about phony soldiers who have faked their service, how does the left justify continuing this fabrication?”

Conservatives Salivating

Newsbusters can't wait for Mark Udall to introduce his resolution. They think it will turn into one long Democrat embarrassment:

Conservatives should hope this resolution is offered by the Democrats, for it would give us a tremendous opportunity to expose the Clinton/Soros/Media Matters/Center for American Progress apparatus. This is especially opportunistic for the press will be all over this debate on the House floor like white on rice given the man in the middle.

Just imagine the theatrical potential of Republican after Republican citing the specifics of how this smear campaign occurred, while entering into the Congressional record the actual tapes of the broadcast in question, as well as the verbatim transcript...

Next, said Republicans could point out that Congress just last year passed the Stolen Valor Act to address a number of abuses of so-called "phony soldiers."

Maybe even more delicious, the person who introduced this legislation in 2005 is a member of Udall's Colorado delegation, Democrat Rep. John T. Salazar.

Wouldn't that be a marvelous debate to be in attendance for?

Life will get entertaining beginning tomorrow.

Just a Charade

A long time ago we learned that the more links one puts in an essay the less likely the audience is to follow any of them. That is not a criticism. It is just a fact.

Last night, Ben DeGrow pointed out the outstanding essay by El Presidente. When we went to it, we saw a lot of links. Fortunately we chose to start following them. They demonstrate that Mark Udall will not just be a fool who is unwittingly politicizing the military when he submits his resolution tomorrow. He will knowingly be making himself a part of the big blue lie machine. That may help him with the MoveOn.org crowd, but it is hard to see how getting involved in this attempt to damage Rush Limbaugh through the use of misquotes will help him with the electorate.

By leading this little charade, Mark Udall will be publicly making a mockery of his own ethics standards, such as they are.