Too Outrageous for Fox News?
"EDITOR'S NOTE: After publishing the Progress Report this morning, Fox News called to protest our description of Ann Coulter as a 'Fox News contributor.' Fox News said Ann Coulter 'is not a contributor to this network' and 'has not been a contributor the last couple of years.' Though Fox News' Sean Hannity described Ms. Coulter in December of 2002 as 'a Fox News contributor,' and despite Coulter appearing 50 times on Fox News since 2002, we regret any confusion this may have caused."
Why the quick denial of association by Fox? Perhaps because Ann Coulter -- who once mused that she regretted that Timothy McVeigh hadn't blown up The New York Times -- has finally written something that shames even the Right.
The Center for American Progress' "Progress Report" posts the following gems this morning:
SAYING AN AMPUTEE VET 'DIDN'T GIVE LIMBS FOR HIS COUNTRY': Coulter wrote, "Cleland didn't give his limbs for his country or leave them on the battlefield" because she says he lost his limbs in a "routine, noncombat mission where he was about to drink beer with his friends." But as the 8/1/99 Esquire Magazine notes, Cleland lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam when a grenade accidentally detonated after he and another soldier jumped off a helicopter in a combat zone.
SAYING A SILVER STAR WINNER IS NOT A "WAR HERO": Coulter said people "should stop allowing [Cleland to be] portrayed as a war hero" despite the fact that, in a separate incident four days before he lost three limbs, Cleland won a Silver Star - one of the highest honors for combat courage the U.S. military gives out. The congressional citation which came with the medal specifically said that during a "heavy enemy rocket and mortar attack Captain Cleland, disregarding his own safety, exposed himself to the rocket barrage as he left his covered position to administer first aid to his wounded comrades. He then assisted in moving the injured personnel to covered positions." The citation concluded, "Cleland's gallant action is in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service, and reflects great credit upon himself, his unit and the United States Army."
SAYING CLELAND WAS "LUCKY" TO HAVE LIMBS BLOWN OFF: Coulter said, "Luckily for Cleland he happened to [lose his limbs] while in Vietnam" and said that had he been injured "at Fort Dix rather than in Vietnam, he would never have been a U.S. Senator." Of course, Cleland probably would not have been dealing with live grenades and enemy fire in the save [sic] haven of Ft. Dix. But, then, many top conservatives might not know this because they do not have firsthand knowledge of a combat zone. President Bush did not go to Vietnam because he was in the Texas National Guard. Vice President Dick Cheney did not serve in the military, saying, "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service." According to the Houston Press in 1999, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) "tried to blame minorities for his lack of military experience" saying, "so many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks" like him. And Rush Limbaugh avoided service by apparently claiming his "anal cysts" prevented him from defending the nation. See more conservatives who attack veterans while avoiding military service themselves. [All emphasis and links courtesy of The Progress Report.]
Is FoxNews really ashamed of the obnoxious notions of the "Belle of New Canaan?" Probably not -- more likely a contract issue. But if this is the kind of raw sewage that's going to be used to defend the brave service of George W. Bush...well...bring it on, punks.
And if you want to get a sense of what Max Cleland went through while recovering from the loss of those three limbs (and no doubt significant related wounds), then read tomorrow's New York Times Magazine story, "The Permanent Scars of Iraq." This emotionally wrenching story, which just made me even more angry about having initially supported Bush's war, illustrates the enormous effects the huge number of amputees and post-traumatic syndrom sufferers are going to have on many communities around the country. And, to Coulter's inane point that somehow the wounds are less meaningful if they don't happen "in combat," one can only respond that in places like Vietnam -- and Iraq -- soldiers are constantly "in combat." Besides, the wounds are equally cataclysmic, whether they come with a Purple Heart or not.
And I don't think the funny papers count.
Meanwhile, we've outsourced the War on Drugs.
*****
It's good to keep in mind that these things aren't real until the ink on the signatures is dry, but this would be what they mean when they use the phrase "Monster Trade."
Why the quick denial of association by Fox? Perhaps because Ann Coulter -- who once mused that she regretted that Timothy McVeigh hadn't blown up The New York Times -- has finally written something that shames even the Right.
The Center for American Progress' "Progress Report" posts the following gems this morning:
SAYING AN AMPUTEE VET 'DIDN'T GIVE LIMBS FOR HIS COUNTRY': Coulter wrote, "Cleland didn't give his limbs for his country or leave them on the battlefield" because she says he lost his limbs in a "routine, noncombat mission where he was about to drink beer with his friends." But as the 8/1/99 Esquire Magazine notes, Cleland lost two legs and an arm in Vietnam when a grenade accidentally detonated after he and another soldier jumped off a helicopter in a combat zone.
SAYING A SILVER STAR WINNER IS NOT A "WAR HERO": Coulter said people "should stop allowing [Cleland to be] portrayed as a war hero" despite the fact that, in a separate incident four days before he lost three limbs, Cleland won a Silver Star - one of the highest honors for combat courage the U.S. military gives out. The congressional citation which came with the medal specifically said that during a "heavy enemy rocket and mortar attack Captain Cleland, disregarding his own safety, exposed himself to the rocket barrage as he left his covered position to administer first aid to his wounded comrades. He then assisted in moving the injured personnel to covered positions." The citation concluded, "Cleland's gallant action is in keeping with the highest traditions of the military service, and reflects great credit upon himself, his unit and the United States Army."
SAYING CLELAND WAS "LUCKY" TO HAVE LIMBS BLOWN OFF: Coulter said, "Luckily for Cleland he happened to [lose his limbs] while in Vietnam" and said that had he been injured "at Fort Dix rather than in Vietnam, he would never have been a U.S. Senator." Of course, Cleland probably would not have been dealing with live grenades and enemy fire in the save [sic] haven of Ft. Dix. But, then, many top conservatives might not know this because they do not have firsthand knowledge of a combat zone. President Bush did not go to Vietnam because he was in the Texas National Guard. Vice President Dick Cheney did not serve in the military, saying, "I had other priorities in the '60s than military service." According to the Houston Press in 1999, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) "tried to blame minorities for his lack of military experience" saying, "so many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks" like him. And Rush Limbaugh avoided service by apparently claiming his "anal cysts" prevented him from defending the nation. See more conservatives who attack veterans while avoiding military service themselves. [All emphasis and links courtesy of The Progress Report.]
Is FoxNews really ashamed of the obnoxious notions of the "Belle of New Canaan?" Probably not -- more likely a contract issue. But if this is the kind of raw sewage that's going to be used to defend the brave service of George W. Bush...well...bring it on, punks.
And if you want to get a sense of what Max Cleland went through while recovering from the loss of those three limbs (and no doubt significant related wounds), then read tomorrow's New York Times Magazine story, "The Permanent Scars of Iraq." This emotionally wrenching story, which just made me even more angry about having initially supported Bush's war, illustrates the enormous effects the huge number of amputees and post-traumatic syndrom sufferers are going to have on many communities around the country. And, to Coulter's inane point that somehow the wounds are less meaningful if they don't happen "in combat," one can only respond that in places like Vietnam -- and Iraq -- soldiers are constantly "in combat." Besides, the wounds are equally cataclysmic, whether they come with a Purple Heart or not.
And I don't think the funny papers count.
Meanwhile, we've outsourced the War on Drugs.
*****
It's good to keep in mind that these things aren't real until the ink on the signatures is dry, but this would be what they mean when they use the phrase "Monster Trade."
posted by John at 6:56 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home