Elizabeth [Edwards] questions Limbaugh's draft deferment

Politico ^ | 10/4/07 | Ben Smith

[Roberts]

An Air America producer just sent over some transcript from an interview their Richard Greene (not our Richard Greene) conducted with Elizabeth Edwards, in which she questioned Rush Limbaugh's Vietnam exemption:

My classmates went to Vietnam, he did not. He was 4F. He had a medical disability, the same medical disability that probably should have stopped him from spending a lifetime in a radio announcer’s chair; but it is true, isn’t it? If he has an inoperable position that allows him not to serve, presumably it should not allow him to sit for long periods of time the way he does. I think this is a serious enough offense for the people who fund him, who buy ads and allow him to be on the air, need to be asked if this is what they really stand for, do they think it is alright for someone who has never served to denigrate the men and women who have simply because they are expressing an opinion. Frankly, I thought that is what we are fighting for.

In the interview, Edwards also suggested that John Kerry shouldn't have conceded when he did in 2004.

RG: Were you disappointed that Senator Kerry conceded as quickly as he did?

EE: I was very disappointed, not just because we did not count the votes, but because we promised people that if they stood in line and fought for the right to vote, that we would fight with them. And I was very disappointed that the decision was made by the campaign, over John’s objection, not to fight.

[potlatch]

S-he’s with G.I.Joe I believe. They went to Barbie’s party!

[LtKerst]

Sure has a lot of energy for someone who is “dying”.

She has cancer of the patriotism....so She is completely unnaffected.

[PA-RIVER]

Back in 72, they did not have the “Don't ask don't tell” policy.

Maybe Johnny did some talking?

[gathersnomoss]

Is Limbaugh...Running For President? He should, oh that would be a hoot.

[dforest]

I have to wonder if her terminal illness isn’t all made up. If it is not. I apologize. But this woman does not appear to be dying.

Liberals, socialists, leftists, communists , have no problem lying, kind of like Muslims, if it is, as they believe it to be, for the common cause they espouse.

Just saying...

[mamelukesabre]

This is the first I’ve heard about Limbaugh’s medical deferment. I know they used to be pretty picky about physical abilities back then. Flat feet used to keep you out of the army. That seems pretty silly by today’s standards. After all, how much marching does a modern soldier do anyway?

Does anyone know what his condition was?

[angcat]

I was thinking the same thing. I would not be surprised if that was all made up.

[tioga]

Very well stated and exactly what I was thinking.

[tioga]

Can you imagine the amount of money Rush could raise in just one week? What a hoot that would be to watch the MSM in a massive hysteria.

[Darkwolf377]

I know I'm in the minority here, but I think this is a GOOD thing.

If the American people see that the ONLY things the democrats can get worked up about aren't terrorists, aren't illegals, aren't balanced budgets, aren't taxes, but TALK SHOW HOSTS they're going to be seen as the loons they are.

I'm being 100% serious. I hope this garbage keeps up. Look at how INTO IT the dems are. Have you ever seen a liberal this worked up about terrorists, about UBL or Saddam?

They are the party of aging children who don't want to grow up, who only get worked up about their silly insult-filled catfights, and who are not capable of functioning as adults. I hope they keep showing it.

[HawaiianGecko]

  You're being a bit dishonest here.  http://www.sss.gov/lotter4.htm   I'm certainly not a John Edwards fan by any stretch, but I am a proponent of honesty.  Now as far as what his wife said; I think it makes her look like a moron.

The highest lottery number called was 95; from the lottery drawing held August 5, 1971 that determined the order in which men born in 1952 were called to report for induction into the military.  Edwards was born June 10th 1953. All men assigned lottery number 95 or any lower number, and who were classified 1-A or 1-A-O (available for military service), were called to report for possible induction.

RESULTS FROM LOTTERY FOR MEN FACING THE DRAFT IN 1973

The lottery drawing held February 2, 1972, determined the order in which men born in 1953 were called to report for induction into the military.

How to read this chart: This chart shows all the birth dates in a given year and the lottery numbers assigned to those dates. Read this chart like a multiplication table. At the top of the chart are the months of the year. On the far left are the dates of the month. The numbers in the center represent lottery numbers. For example: To find the lottery number assigned to July 15, look down from "July" till it matches up with the number "15" on the left side of the table. The corresponding number in the middle is "359." This means that all men born on July 15, 1953, were assigned the lottery number 359.

This lottery was conducted for men who would have been called in 1973; however, no new draft orders were issued after 1972.

Results from Lottery for Men Facing the Draft in 1973

	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec
1	150	112	203	012	058	015	039	323	219	215	107	170
2	328	278	322	108	275	360	297	027	017	128	214	090
3	042	054	220	104	166	245	109	003	226	103	232	056
4	028	068	047	280	172	207	092	313	356	079	339	250
5	338	096	266	254	292	230	139	063	354	086	223	031
6	036	271	001	088	337	087	132	208	173	041	211	336
7	111	154	002	163	145	251	285	057	144	129	299	267
8	206	347	153	050	201	282	355	131	097	157	312	210
9	197	136	321	234	276	083	179	007	364	116	151	120
10	037	361	331	272	100	178	089	249	217	342	257	073
11	174	026	239	350	307	064	202	125	334	319	159	082
12	126	195	044	023	115	190	340	198	043	171	066	085
13	298	263	244	169	049	318	306	329	229	269	124	335
14	341	348	117	081	224	095	305	205	353	014	237	038
15	221	308	152	343	165	016	359	241	235	277	176	137
16	309	227	094	119	101	032	074	019	225	059	209	187
17	231	046	363	183	273	091	199	008	189	177	284	294
18	072	011	357	242	098	238	121	113	289	192	160	013
19	303	127	358	158	148	052	332	105	228	167	270	168
20	161	106	262	314	274	077	033	162	141	352	301	149
21	099	316	300	004	310	315	005	030	123	288	287	080
22	259	020	317	264	333	146	286	140	268	191	102	188
23	258	247	022	279	216	212	365	302	296	193	320	252
24	062	261	071	362	246	061	324	138	236	256	180	155
25	243	260	065	255	122	143	035	290	291	009	025	006
26	311	051	024	233	118	345	204	076	029	078	344	351
27	110	186	181	265	293	330	060	034	248	325	135	194
28	304	295	045	055	018	053	185	040	070	327	130	156
29	283	---	021	093	133	075	222	084	196	349	147	175
30	114	---	213	069	048	142	200	182	184	346	134	281
31	240	---	326	---	067	---	253	218	---	010	---	164

 

[DanielLongo]

Too funny.

[L.N. Smithee]

Has Mr. Edwards served? If not, STFU Elizabeth.

It doesn't even matter!

I'm sick of people acting as if serving in the military is necessary to be Commander-in-Chief because it's NOT.

From the Constitution, Article II, Section I:

---

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States...

...The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

---

That's IT. Nothing about surviving boot camp being a prerequisite.

The same people who in 2000 and 2004 unfavorably compared W. Bush's National Guard service with that of Vietnam vets Gore and Kerry didn't care a whit in 1992 that H.W. Bush was a decorated WW II pilot and that Bill Clinton lied to an University of Arkansas ROTC instructor to avoid being drafted. And don't forget how H.W., when he first ran and won, had to overcome the media-driven so-called "Wimp Factor" even though he was running against Michael Dukakis! W. Bush is supposedly a "chickenhawk" for starting a war after flying fighter jets stateside, but Clinton, an anti-Vietnam war demonstrator who ordered bombing of Iraq's no-fly zone and invaded Haiti and Serbia, isn't?

It's silly to get into this Que es mas macho? game because each party whips out veteran status only when it's convenient to their favorite candidate. Remember how Jim Webb's campaign issued a press release saying that "While Jim Webb was...fighting for our freedoms ...in Vietnam," George Allen "cut and run" and "was playing cowboy at a dude ranch in Nevada"? And that was only a Senatorial race!

If you're going to infer that nobody who never put on fatigues should lead this country, you should, as soon as possible, propose that a Constitutional amendment make it a requirement. Oh, but nobody wants to do that, because it will eliminate viable candidates from both parties, and even cause intraparty strife. Among the Democrats, Hillary, Obama, Edwards, Biden, Richardson, and Kucinich all have a zippo military record. Who has experience? Chris Dodd and Mike Gravel, who was, believe it or not, an intelligence officer!

But wait; neither Rudy nor Fred nor Mitt nor Sam nor Tom have served -- sorry, thanks for playing. That leaves who? John McCain, Duncan Hunter, and Ron Paul. Yeah, that's a winner of a ticket among those three.

Military background does not necessarily have any bearing on a candidate's policies, intelligence, or character. Think of where this country might be now if John Kerry blinded enough Americans with the reflection of his awards, earned legitimately or not. And since Eisenhower, the most militarily experienced men elected President were Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, neither of whom are spoken among the all-time greats.

Get a grip, people.

[an amused spectator]

Weekend At Elizabeth’s II (Dead @ The Whitehouse)

[HawaiianGecko]

  "I know I'm in the minority here, but I think this is a GOOD thing. "
You might be in the minority, but you're not alone in your thinking.

[donna]

Edwards was born on June 10, 1953, so he was 18 in 1971.

Nixon ended the draft in June, 1973.

What did John Edwards do about the draft from 1971 to 1973?

[L.N. Smithee]

And since Eisenhower, the most militarily experienced men elected President were Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush, neither of whom are spoken among the all-time greats.

Arrrrgh! Since KENNEDY! Mea culpa.

[elcid1970]

Holy smoke!

I’m no fan of the power-mad Edweirds, either, but after reading your post, I shudder to think what all those “Comment removed by Admin Moderator” posts must have looked liked.

Edward’s wife is as much a political player as he is, and she made herself that way and is therefore fair game. I don’t believe her medical condition renders her public statements as immune to either criticism or debate.

But let’s stick to critiqueing what she actually says.

[Sue Perkick]

At this point wondering about that is certainly not unreasonable. We’ve all seen enough to know.

Something about this stinks.

[Road Warrior ‘04]

I truly wish Rush would take the gloves off and lambast the masculine side of the Ewards family, Elizabeth. But, I think he is too much of a gentleman to do it. On the other hand, if she is going to put herself in the fray, then she is fair game.