Two Views On Rush Limbaugh

The October 12, 2007 issue of Stars & Stripes had several letters dealing with comments by Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter. We print two opposing views:
“In response to the opinions voiced in the October 8 letters to the editor reference to Rush Limbaugh and Ann Coulter, I disagree with the writers and hope that Armed Forces Network would continue to air their programs. When taken in full context, it has been clearly shown that Limbaugh did not disrespect the military with his remarks. Coulter’s writing style is full of hyperbole and needs to be read with that in mind. She is opinionated, but factual. To call her a liar is libelous. .Until more entertaining politically conservative pundits can be found, keep Limbaugh and Coulter, please.”
Chaplain (Col) James Hoke, Stuttgart, Germany

“I served honorably for 20 years in the U.S. military, but today I oppose the war in Iraq. I assume Limbaugh will call me a “phony veteran.” Considering the source, a man who has the gall to defame those who served while he never served a single day in the military (allegedly because of a boil), I would wear such an accusation as a badge of honor.”
Maj. Donan de Wind (ret) Austin, Texas

I can think of many things Ann Coulter is full of besides hyperbole, but being in polite company I will not make such a libelous comment. Why is it that super patriots anxious for war like Limbaugh, Coulter, Dick Cheney, George Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, etc… never served their country in the military? Why is it that people like Limbaugh and Coulter will defame men who served like John Kerry or former Senator Clelland who lost both arms and legs in Vietnam, but get upset if someone makes a critical remark about Bush?