This is copied and pasted from the Glenn Beck  website:
  
 What Mr. Limbaugh Actually Said
OCTOBER 02,  2007
  
 GLENN BECK PROGRAM
BEGIN  TRANSCRIPT
  
 CALLER 2: Yeah, and, you know what  --
  
 LIMBAUGH: "Save the -- keep the troops safe" or  whatever. I -- it's not possible, intellectually, to follow these  people.
  
 CALLER 2: No, it's not, and what's really funny  is, they never talk to real soldiers. They like to pull these soldiers that come  up out of the blue and talk to the media. 
  
 LIMBAUGH: The phony soldiers.
  
 CALLER 2: The phony soldiers. If you talk to a  real soldier, they are proud to serve. They want to be over in Iraq. They  understand their sacrifice, and they're willing to sacrifice for their  country.
  
 LIMBAUGH: They joined to be in Iraq. They  joined -- 
  
 CALLER 2: A lot of them -- the new kids,  yeah.
  
 LIMBAUGH: Well, you know where you're going  these days, the last four years, if you signed up. The odds are you're going  there or Afghanistan or somewhere.
  
 CALLER 2: Exactly, sir.
  
 ***After responding to another unrelated point  the caller makes, he then goes back to the 'phony soldier' subject. The gap was  about 1 minute and 35 seconds before he says the following*** 
  
 LIMBAUGH: It's just, it's frustrating and  maddening, and it is why they must be kept in the minority. Look, I want to  thank you, Mike, for calling. I appreciate it very much. I gotta -- let me see  -- got something -- here is a "Morning Update" that we did recently talking  about fake soldiers. This is a story of who the left props up as heroes. And  they have their celebrities. 
  
 One of them was Jesse MacBeth. Now, he was a  "corporal," I say in quotes -- 23 years old.
  
 What made Jesse MacBeth a hero to the anti-war  crowd wasn't his Purple Heart. It wasn't his being affiliated with post  traumatic stress disorder from tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, though. What made  Jesse MacBeth, Army Ranger, a hero to the left was his courage in their view off  the battlefield.
  
 Without regard to consequences, he told the  world the abuses he had witnessed in Iraq: American soldiers killing unarmed  civilians, hundreds of men, women, even children. In one gruesome account  translated into Arabic and spread widely across the internet, Army Ranger Jesse  MacBeth describes the horrors this way:
  
 'We would burn their bodies. We would hang  their bodies from the rafters in the mosque.'
  
 Now, recently, Jesse MacBeth, a poster boy for  the anti-war left, had his day in court, and you know what? He was sentenced to  five months in jail and three years probation for falsifying a Department of  Veterans Affairs' claim and his Army discharge record.
  
 He was in the Army. Jesse MacBeth was in the  Army, folks, briefly -- 44-days before he washed out of boot camp. Jesse MacBeth  isn't an Army Ranger. Never was. He isn't a corporal. Never was. He never won  the Purple Heart and he was never in combat to witness the horrors he claimed to  have seen." 
  
 You probably haven't even heard about this, and  if you have, you haven't heard much about it. This doesn't fit the narrative and  the template of the drive-by media and the Democrat [sic] Party as to who a  genuine war hero is.
  
 Don't look for any retractions, by the way, not  from the anti-war left, the anti-military drive-by media or the Arabic websites  that spread Jesse MacBeth's lies about our troops, because the truth of the left  is fiction, is what serves their purpose. They have to lie about such atrocities  'cause they can't find any that fit the template of the way they see the U.S.  military.
  
 In other words, for the American anti-war left,  the greatest inconvenience they face is the truth. 
  
 END TRANSCRIPT
 
  
 Democrats have said that good news in Iraq is bad  news for them. They insisted that we go by what the Generals on the ground said,  until they didn't like what the General said. Read on:
  
 Clyburn: Positive Report by Petraeus Could Split  House Democrats on War 
 By Dan Balz and Chris Cillizza
Washington Post Staff  Writer and Washingtonpost.com Staff Writer
Monday, July 30, 2007; 6:26  PM
 
 
House Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) said Monday that a strongly  positive report on progress on Iraq by Army Gen. David Petraeus likely would  split Democrats in the House and impede his party's efforts to press for a  timetable to end the war.
 Clyburn, in an interview with the washingtonpost.com video program  PostTalk, said Democrats might be wise to wait for the Petraeus report,  scheduled to be delivered in September, before charting next steps in their  year-long struggle with President Bush over the direction of U.S.  strategy.
 Clyburn noted that Petraeus carries significant weight among the 47  members of the Blue Dog caucus in the House, a group of moderate to conservative  Democrats. Without their support, he said, Democratic leaders would find it  virtually impossible to pass legislation setting a timetable for  withdrawal.
 "I think there would be enough support in that group to want to stay the  course and if the Republicans were to stay united as they have been, then it  would be a problem for us," Clyburn said. "We, by and large, would be wise to  wait on the report."
 Many Democrats have anticipated that, at best, Petraeus and U.S.  ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker would present a mixed analysis of the success of  the current troop surge strategy, given continued violence in Baghdad. But of  late there have been signs that the commander of U.S. forces might be preparing  something more generally positive. Clyburn said that would be "a real big  problem for us."
 Clyburn's comments came as House and Senate Democrats try to figure out  their next steps in the legislative battle. Clyburn said he could foresee a  circumstance in which House Democrats approve a measure without a timetable for  withdrawing U.S. forces, which has been the consistent goal of the party  throughout the months-long debate. But he said he could just as easily see  Democrats continue to include a timetable.
 Clyburn also address the reasons behind declining approval ratings for  Congress, which spiked earlier in the year when Democrats took over the House  and Senate. The most recent Washington Post-ABC News poll showed just 37 percent  approving of the performance of Congress.
 "Remember right after the election it went very high on approval,?" he  said. "Then all of a sudden people saw that we were not yielding the kind of  result that they wanted to yield."
 He said most Americans still do not know some of the domestic legislation  that has been approved. Fewer understand that, despite Democratic majorities in  both houses, that it takes 60 votes to pass anything legislation in the Senate.  
 Clyburn noted that while overall approval ratings of Congress are low,  people still rate Democrats higher than Republicans. "People feel good about the  Democratic Party, they just don't feel real good about the Congress  itself."
     
  
 The intensity of the left's determination to  abandon Iraq was reflected in the reaction to a single line in Hillary Clinton's speech to the Veterans  of Foreign Wars last week. "We've begun to change tactics in Iraq," she said,  referring to the surge, "and in some areas, particularly al-Anbar province, it's  working."
That mild comment instantly drew fire from  Clinton's Democratic rivals. John Edwards's campaign manager, David Bonior,  warned her against "undermining the effort in the Congress to end this  war."
New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, another presidential hopeful,  piled on: "The surge is not working. I do not give President Bush the same  credit on Iraq that Hillary does." When Barack Obama addressed the VFW one day  later, he stuck to the defeatists' script. "Obama Sees a 'Complete Failure' in  Iraq," The New York Times headlined its report  on Aug. 22.
Within 48 hours, Clinton was scurrying to toe the all-is-lost line once  again: "The surge was designed to give the Iraqi government  time to take steps to ensure a political solution. It has failed. . . . We need  to . . . start getting out now."    
  
 The thing is, Liberals get away with this kind of  thing because they do a better job of running the media. And really, until  conservatives learn to do the same, they'll continue to.