All Episodes
Previous Next
June 21, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:23
June 21, 2005, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi folks and welcome back.
It's the EIB network and L Rush Both the second hour, the second excursion into broadcast excellence today.
I am your highly trained broadcast specialist, executing assigned host duties flawlessly.
Zero mistakes.
A thrill and a delight to have you with us.
Uh phone number 800 282-2882.
The email address is Rush at EIBNet.com.
We're coming up with your phone calls in the next segment.
But now we start the process of humanizing Saddam Hussein.
Thrust unexpectedly into the role of prison guards for Saddam.
Several young American soldiers found the deposed Iraqi leader to be a friendly, talkative, clean freak who loved raisin brand for breakfast, could down a large bag of Doritos in ten minutes, and insisted he was still president of Iraq.
This uh interview published Monday in GQ magazine.
Well, it's the July issue becoming up.
The uh excerpts were published on Monday, the AP and others have them, and also on the Today Show.
The men said that Saddam greatly admires President Reagan and thought President Clinton was okay, but he had harsh words for both President Bush's, each of whom went to war against him.
The Bush father, son, no good, said Corporal Jonathan Paco Reese, 22 of Millville, Pennsylvania, quotes Saddam is saying in English.
But his fellow GI specialist Sean O'Shea, who was then 19, says that Saddam later softened that view of the Bushes.
Towards the end he was saying that he doesn't hold any hard feelings, just wanted to talk to Bush to make friends with him.
Well, we have we have some audio uh sound bites here.
Oh, yeah, one thing, uh O'Shea said that uh when he told Saddam he wasn't married, that Saddam started telling him what to do.
He was like, You gotta find a good woman, not too smart, not too dumb, not too old, not too young, one that can cook and clean.
Saddam Hussein, Don, yes, advising American soldiers on women.
And uh marriage in the next in the next GQ.
And uh then he smiled and made uh Saddam smiled and made what O'Shea interpreted as a spanking gesture, laughed and went back to washing his clothes in the sink.
They say Saddam's preoccupied with cleanliness, washing up after shaking hands and using diaper wipes to clean his meal trays, his utensils and the table before he eats.
He had germophobia, or whatever you call it.
Uh the article quotes the GIs on Saddam's eating preferences.
Uh Raisin Brand Crunch was his breakfast favorite, no fruit loops, he told O'Shea.
He ate fish and chicken, but refused beef at uh at dinner.
Loved Cheetos at first.
When they ran out of those, he would get grumpy.
So that one day they substituted Doritos, and Saddam forgot about the Cheetos.
He'd eat a family-sized bag of Doritos in ten minutes.
This sounds like how you deal with your pet.
Well, let's go to the audio sound bites on CNN this morning.
The host Miles O'Brien interviewed Sean O'Shea and Corporal Jonathan Reese and Lisa De Polo, who wrote the story for GQ about guarding Saddam.
O'Brien says, You obviously had a lot of interpretations uh with Saddam Hussein uh of him before you met him.
How did your expectations compare to the reality?
When we met him, he just stepped right out of the cell and shook my hand, said nice to meet you, but like everything I've ever known about him, I never would have expected those.
So the the next question uh was well, so Saddam was actually a polite person.
And and when he says nice to meet you, of course, what uh we would reflexively say would be nice to meet you.
But is it nice to meet him?
Definitely not.
I mean, when when you first meet him, you know, he comes off as a good good guy, and in the back of your mind, you're just thinking that he's a total dictator.
So Brian then says, All right, then lunch is next.
What's the typical lunch for Saddam Hussein?
He pretty much just he got whatever we got but double portion, so he was eating pretty well.
Yeah.
All right, after after lunch, he had some recreation time.
Let's just walk back and forth.
Uh he had a wreck area where he there was room for him to walk and exercise.
He was sitting, he would pray or write or smoke.
So then it was I'm just gonna run these by a sit and pray and write and smoke.
He would smoke.
Now I wonder what Dick Durbin thinks of this.
I wonder what The left thinks of this horrible treatment that we are meeting out and handing out to Saddam Hussein.
As I say, ladies and gentlemen, go to Rush Limbaugh.com and we have put together uh uh a photo montage of what it would be like if Saddam were at Gitmo.
In fact, sounds like Saddam is at Git Mow when you listen to all this.
Giving him cigarettes?
Yes, of course we're giving him cigarettes.
We're good guys, Mr. We're giving Saddam cigarettes.
We're giving him diaper wipes to clean his utensils.
We're giving him every Doritos, Cheetos, Raisin brand crunch or whatever the heck it is.
No fruit loops.
He's getting chicken, he's getting fish.
So the uh the the question uh uh well Lisa DePolo uh added uh something after that last comment from uh from O'Shea about how he would sit, he would pray, he would write, or he would smoke.
It's fabulous.
I mean, the insight they had into Saddam Hussein.
I mean, it was just amazing.
We could never learn enough about someone like him.
And I just thought it was great that these young men were able to connect with him and learn about him in a way that you know world leaders haven't.
Well, yeah, okay, fine, but how's this piece of prisoner?
That's why.
World leaders, who knows what world leaders knew about him?
We uh that there were plenty of them that met the guy and talked to him and did business with him.
Fidel Castro sent him cigars.
Dan rather looked at oh, he loves Rather, but he thinks Rather is a good guy, Saddam does.
But Dan Rather looked into his eyes and saw a decent man.
You know, we were all wondering, Dan, why didn't you capture him?
We can you could have stopped all this if it had just taken Saddam into custody when you got that one interview opportunity.
All right, let's move over now to the CBS early show.
Harry Smith talking to the same guys, Sean O'Shea and uh Corporal Jonathan Paco Reese and Lisa DePolo.
Uh Harry Smith says the Iraqi dictator has developed a Jones for junk food, it appears.
Cheetos came first, and then uh as we ran out of Cheetos one day, so we gave him Doritos instead.
And they just never went back.
He loved them.
So he used to always ask uh Jesse's one of the one of the guys that was over there with us.
He'd always make a little triangle symbol.
He's like Doris, he called him Doris, D-O-R I S, and he'd just be like Doris, Dass and Doris.
So he would always get him a bag of chips.
I mean, we we'd get him like a family-sized bag, you know.
Uh we went to the PX and got him some Doritos there, and he would he would eat them all in one sitting, you know, like 10 minutes, the bag was gone.
The once powerful dictator, alone in his cell with his snack food, like the guy said, surreal.
Yeah, surreal.
I don't know what that were humanizing Saddam Hussein here.
Surreal, like the guy said, surreal.
Yeah, it is.
Okay, can you believe this in the midst of the Democratic Party trying to make its bones on the basis of how rotten to the core we are to prisoners?
And Abu Grab and down at Gitmo.
We get this.
Well, folks, I'm sorry.
It's the Twilight Zone.
And now we're humanizing this guy.
He's not so bad.
I mean, how could a guy who can eat a bag of Doritos in 10 minutes actually kill 300,000 people, have a bunch of rape rooms?
How can a guy who takes the time to advise American soldiers on the kind of women they need be so bad that he could kill 300,000 people and and use poison gas on his own people?
How could this be?
Uh how how could a guy who is so concerned about cleanliness and so concerned about germs, how could he have such a rotten, dirty country that the rest of his people lived in?
We must misunderstand this man.
Maybe we've misunderstood.
By the way, he loved Ronald Reagan.
That he shouldn't have said that.
The press would be a little suspicious of him there.
But he did cancel that out by talking about how much he loved Dan Rather as well.
And Clinton was okay.
Uh but uh I'll tell you know what, I I think Saddam knows the power germs because he used germs and the Kurds.
It's exactly right.
He germed the Kurds, if you will.
Uh he used uh used poison gas on them.
But in the meantime, you know, we don't hear any of that.
And I'm not blaming the soldiers.
I mean, I'm I'm I'm not I'm not really blaming anybody.
I just think this is just who we are.
We take a look at at pure evil, and we don't want to see it.
We don't want to believe that such evil exists around us.
And so we humanize these people.
And not so bad.
Well, look at the story on sex offenders today.
You know, punishing them too hard is gonna make them even bigger sex offenders.
And Saddam Hussein can smoke in jail, can send his guards to the PX to get bags of Doritos, and people in New York City cannot legally smoke in public places.
Saddam can smoke in jail.
Yep, yep, you got it.
You got it.
And we are the horrible, rotten to the core United States of America.
We'll be back, and we will resume right after this.
Stay with us.
You know, it sounds like uh to me that folks, this sounds like Saddam's uh not eating as well as the prisoners at Gitmo.
Uh the prisons of Gitmo.
Did you see this the other gain?
The average weight gain is five to seven pounds for your average Gitmo prisoner.
Yeah, Duncan Hunter announced this.
They're gaining weight, Brian.
They're gaining weight.
Five to seven pounds.
You saw the meal that uh the sample meal they get, as uh presented by Congressman Duncan Hunter, and poor old Saddam, he's just eating the Doritos over there all he can get.
You know, there's not a whole lot of nutrition there.
But folks, you've got to go to Rush Limbaugh.com, go to the go to the homepage and just take it, take a look at the link right next to the orange club gitmo t-shirt uh for the Club Gitmo brochure.
There's a new link that says Saddam Checks In.
Uh just click on that.
Just take a look at it.
You you get you'll get a kick out of it, and so will the uh the rabidly left Democrat websites who will think that we're just we're just we're just low as we can be to make fun of what's going on down there.
John in New York City, welcome, sir.
Nice to have you on the program.
Hello.
Yes, hello.
Yes, hello, Rush.
Uh I I'm calling because I'm about three quarters of the way through Edward Klein's book, The Truth About Hillary.
And uh it's a must read.
Now, much of it we've known before, we've we've heard about before, but it's put together as a psychological study of this woman and uh a very, very, very dangerous woman.
Well, but you think there's gonna cause a backlash.
Everybody's out there saying the existence of the book is gonna Well, it's already you know, John, it's already started.
The backlash has already started.
Here, you're you're you're three quarters of the way through it.
But but the press is already suggesting that this is nothing more than a right wing plot, and it's typical right wingers that are trying to destroy Hillary and they're circling the wagons trying to defend her.
Well, well, let me tell you if this were a book, let me just if I may personalize this for just a second.
If this were a book that alleged things about me and my medical records, the press would want to know even more that is in the book, and they would be going all over the place demanding to know everything in it.
For about my medical records or whatever.
I'm sorry to personalize this, folks, but I can't help it in this case.
And I'm not the only one.
Go talk to Tom Delay.
Go talk to Newt Gingrich or talk to anybody who has things uh alleged about them in the most dubious places.
National Inquirer, whatever.
If it's alleged about a conservative, everybody in the press believes it, reports it as gospel, and then begins their own investigation trying to see what they can see.
In the case of Hillary, here you have a left-wing writer and a left-wing publisher or liberal publisher uh putting this book out, and they immediately attack conservatives for talking about the book.
We didn't write it.
We didn't put it together, we didn't conceive it.
This book is put together by a guy who used to write for the New York Times and Newsweek.
So, John, the backlash has already begun.
Now you say you're three quarters of the way through it.
Why should people read it?
They should read it because it takes the facts, some of the some of the facts that we already know, and puts them together in a study from just before she went to Wellesley and her her political leanings all through to the point where she is now in the Senate, ready to pounce on the presidency.
Yeah, well, um I I'm uh I've heard one comment.
I've heard one comment aside from you from somebody who has read this book, and that is that the book will surprise people.
Uh that that it's well written and that it's it's gonna surprise people, whatever that means.
That's uh that that's the extent of my knowledge about.
All I know is that the same media that wants access to every medical record of mine and everything else of mine they could get their hands on is in full defense of Hillary Clinton's privacy and her personal life.
Everybody in the media that wanted everything they could get on Tom Delay, or you fill in the blank, it doesn't matter.
The same media is circling the wagons to defend Hillary Clinton and her personal life and trying to discredit those who have dug up elements of it.
I'm just I'm just telling you, it whether it's going to cause a backlash is too.
I think what's going to happen, folks, the whatever election 2006 for the Senate, 2008 for the presidency.
I mean, this book's going to be old news by the time that comes out, though the election comes up.
This is much ado about nothing, but the press is taking every left-wing media, every opportunity they can to defend her and circle the wagons, and you just don't see that much.
The press, I don't get they generally don't defend people in public life who have things alleged about them.
Uh by anybody.
That's what stands out about this.
Uh here's John and Frederick, Maryland.
You're next, sir.
Great to have you with us.
Hi, Russ.
I love you, man.
Thank you, sir.
I want to tell you, I think this book is a plant, and I think that they're intentionally trying to help her get to be the president, because I believe she has a laundry list of issues, and they're well aware of what's going to come back to haunt her before the election.
So they're trying to inoculate us against or inoculate her against some of the more extreme attacks that are going to try and bring her down.
Yeah, I think this is I think that's a that's a distinct possibility.
I mean, if you want to stalk up talk about conspiracies, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if this whole thing's a left-wing idea.
Put the book out there, label it a right wing hatchet job, and use that to inoculate any of the any information in the book or to inoculate her against any criticism down the road.
Forget what's in the book, but just say, well, you can't believe the critics, they're all right wingers.
It's it's sort of like good old Donovan McNabb.
Yeah, guys, very lucky, because I deign to criticize the media's coverage of McNabb.
McNabb is now inoculated against any criticism whatsoever by media people in the NFL.
I mean, because they don't dare risk being on the same side of the issue with me.
So, you know, that's why McNabb wants to hire me as his marsh should hire me as his marketing agent.
Because he's been inoculated against criticism.
Well, the same thing with Hillary here.
Hillary, because of this book, the the real risk is that after this book comes out, and if the press successfully tars and feathers the right for having anything to do with this, uh it's gonna then any further criticism of her down the line after this book will be shrugged off as it's no big deal.
To personalize it again.
Can you imagine anybody with any criticism of me, any allegation about me that might come out, can you imagine anybody in the mainstream press circling the wagons to help me and to deny people any uh uh entree into my personal life or my private affair?
No, it'd be just the opposite.
Let's put on the blinders and go full speed ahead and see what we can dig up.
And I'm just a guy on the radio, she's running for president, and we're not supposed to find out about her.
We're not supposed to have any questions about her.
We're not supposed to even have any suspicions about her, and she's running for president.
I'm just a guy on the radio.
You know, Tom DeLay, we can go out and we can we can do all we can to destroy his life, ditto Newt Gingrich.
I mean, I the the list is long on the right.
It's just it it really this is a standout and it's a great object lesson here, folks, for any of you who still have any doubts about you know where the mainstream press comes down and all these things.
Robert in Richmond, Virginia, you're next.
Great to have you on the program, sir.
Hey, Rush, thanks for having me on today.
This is the John Bolton closure vote.
I was just wondering if you had caught any of the city coverage yesterday of the three Democrats that took the floor, Biden, Boxer, and Dowed.
And I was wondering if you noticed, or Dodd actually, if you notice the fact that all three of those uh senators made the statement that this isn't about John Bolton, referring to the bolt vote for closure.
Yeah.
And then they they turn around and they say that they're willing to give a closure vote, but not until they get the documents related to the um, I guess the intelligence uh look, that's all sweat.
But look, and I know where you're going with this, and it is all about Bolton.
It's totally kind of my thought was it's a very important thing.
It's totally, it's totally about look when when when they come out and say nobody asks them.
When somebody says, hey, look, this isn't political.
Oh, wait, I didn't ask you if it's political.
Uh this isn't about John Bolt.
Wait, we didn't ask you about Bolton.
They just volunteered.
It's not about Bolton.
They know what the criticism is going to be, but it's precisely about when somebody tells you, hey, it's not the money, it's the money.
Somebody tells you they're doing it, oh no, no, I'm not doing this for the money.
I'm doing this because of The goodness of my heart, it's the money.
When somebody starts denying allegations that haven't been made, ha ha ha ha ha, there's truth to the allegation.
I'm just telling you here, they uh they don't want they don't want a guy like Bolton going to the U.N. because he might straighten it up.
He might actually represent the U.S. at the U.N. rather than capitulate to the anti U.S. forces at the U.N., which is what the American left wants.
Remember, any enemy of George Bush is a friend of the American left.
Any enemy of George Bush is a friend of the Democratic Party.
And John Bolton, he is an enemy because he's a friend of George W. Bush.
And he's going to straighten the place up or would try back in a sec.
And let's not forget, folks, it was uh what was it, a week or two ago when uh the whole Watergate uh thing when Mark Felt came out?
What did Hillary say?
Hillary said that the press is going too soft on Bush.
There needs to be a deep throat type examination into this administration, they should stop acting like wimps.
And so what happens now that to prove to Hillary that they're not wimps, they're going after everybody that has nothing to do with this book about her.
Everybody that's got nothing to do with it is being assaulted.
Right wingers have nothing to do with this book, conservatives didn't publish it.
Speaking of all this, by the way, a law firm under scrutiny for its role in arranging overseas trips for members of Congress says that House ethics lawyers, House ethics lawyers advised this law firm several years ago that it could pay for some congressional travel.
This is an assertion that may bolster the argument of Tom Delay that he did nothing wrong in accepting lavish trips organized by the firm star lobbyist.
He's not the only one who did either.
I'm reading this from the New York Times.
They only mentioned Delay, but there were countless others who accepted payments from this Abramov guy and his firm, and we know that there are all kinds of members of the House and Senate who go all over the world on somebody else's dime, and there was a mad dash to report all of these trips once this investigation of Delay got going.
We also learned the other day that the prosecutor down in Texas looking into Delay has actually forgotten charges or or eliminated stopped investigations of clients that contributed money to some of his pet causes.
This is Ronnie Earle.
Did you hear about that?
The prosecutor looking into delay, the Democrat prosecutor looking into Delay actually stopped investigating firms and others that had contributed some of his pet causes.
And yet, how how long has this gone on?
How long has the press been trying to destroy Tom Delay?
Single-handedly, a single individual with all of these innuendo, all these these false allegations, all of this trumped up, all these trumped up charges, repeated ad nauseum.
How much curiosity has there been on the part of the press to get to the bottom of the ethical lapses of Tom DeLay?
And we aren't even supposed to ask any questions about Hillary Clinton, because if we do, it means that we're just mean right wingers who have nothing but personal destruction on our minds.
That's right.
Internal memos and email messages from the Seattle firm of Preston Gates and Ellis say that the firm contacted two lawyers on the House Ethics Committee in 1996 when it began organizing large numbers of trips.
And it was told that House rules probably allowed lobbyists to pay for a lawmaker's travel as long as a client reimbursed them.
The memorandums and the email messages report that the ethics committee specifically addressed trips that the firm's cheap lobbyist Jack Abramov arranged for Tom Delay and other lawmakers to the Northern Mariana Islands, an American Commonwealth in the Pacific that was among Mr. Abramov's clients.
In 1997, a year after the firm's contact with the Ethics Committee, Abramov arranged trips for Delay to the Marianas and to Russia because a law firm was told by the House Ethics Committee lawyers it was okay.
And that's all Delay has ever said.
But did anybody believe him?
No, they didn't believe him because as a conservative and as a Republican, he's automatically guilty.
And it doesn't matter who says it, and it doesn't matter where they say it.
And it's true of any conservative.
You can have the wackiest allegation from the most disreputable source, and the Left wing media will snap it up and believe it as though it is gospel from whatever they consider their Bible.
And then they embark on this personal destruction crusade.
And lo and behold, we then learn that everything Delay has said about this is true.
And that everything that he did was sanctioned by lawyers in the House Ethics Committee as far back as 1996.
And 1997.
Now, Tom DeLay could probably ask, okay, where do I go to get my reputation back?
Where does he go?
He won't say that, but I mean he's been under assault for all these years by the Democrats for for these so-called ethics lapses.
And it's uh it's just amazing.
And I only bring this up because we're we're now in this context of you can't even talk about Hillary Clinton.
Don't you dare, and don't you dare quote from that book, and don't you dare look into her past.
It's unsavory.
What do you mean what she did at Wellesley?
What do you care how she and Bill met?
What does it matter?
It's none of her business and none of our business.
And it doesn't matter how she's going to lead the country.
Whenever there's any allegation of any impropriety among the Clintons, we're not supposed to look at it because it doesn't affect the way they're going to lead.
So there clearly is a uh is a double stand.
You would never have a press organization sue the Clintons to find out what their personal records of anything were.
You would never have a press organization sue John Kerry to find out what his Form 180 said or is his naval record said.
You still don't know what Bill Clinton's medical records are because he hasn't released them.
And he was president of the United States.
And is anybody in the press made one effort to find out what's in them?
No, they haven't.
In fact, if anybody says they're interested, they get criticized for just trying to find another reason to take down this great president.
So I'm I'm just I'm just telling you here, folks, it's it's it's it's it's uh it's a two-edged sword, and it is a there are so many double standards out there where the where the press is concerned.
And what really ticks me off about this is that this this whole Hillary book has nothing to do with anybody in the conservative wing of any party.
It has nothing to do with a bunch of right wingers.
No right winger wrote the book, no right winger collaborated, no right wing.
Well, there might have been, I don't know about that.
But I do know that no right winger wrote it, and no right winger works at this publishing house uh and it's not a right-wing publishing house.
They may have a conservative imprint, and that's another thing.
This I forget who published this book, but this is the first book in their new conservative imprint.
Well, that alone is designed to discredit the thing.
Don't you think?
With the mainstream, oh, yeah, it's probably just another one of these rednaire books.
It's probably just somebody from human events.
Oh, it's something out there from the American spectator.
You can't trust these people, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
But they are sealing their own fate because they do not understand just exactly how they are seen, and they do not understand that it's all out in the open now, and the double standards that they have, and they and the the eagerness they have to nail and condemn and and uh convict others while they seek to exonerate uh uh their own friends, all that's plainly visible now to people.
And there's a reason why newspapers are losing subscriptions and and circulation.
There's a reason why left-wing news organizations are barely afloat.
There is a reason for all of this, and it's because you know we hear this word fairness throughout our society.
It's this not fair.
Well, I'm gonna tell you something.
The mainstream press, for all its talk, well, yeah, maybe we're not objective, but we're fair.
No, they aren't.
They are they don't even get close to being fair, and they don't make any pretense at being fair, and that's what's plainly visible to the casual observer.
There's no fairness in the way the mainstream press is going around reporting on people and events in this country.
And it's been this way for a long, long time, now plainly visible to more and more people.
Steve and Tom's River, New Jersey, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
I I just finished reading the book, Hell to Pay by Barbara Olson.
She was the one that was on that plane that crashed into the Pentagon.
And I got news for you.
I can't believe anybody would want to read a new book about Hillary when everything that has ever been said about this woman has been in that book.
It is the most uh eye-revealing book you ever would read.
And it's the story about how if you're a friend of Bill or Hillary, and if something is going wrong with their administration, you're the one that's going to get blamed.
They walk away clean.
It's the most annoying thing to know that this woman has a possibility of becoming president.
Well, according to the Democrats, it's not just a possibility.
She's already got the nomination locked up, and it's only a matter of time.
If we can just have the election tomorrow, we could confirm this that she is the next president.
That's that's what's been established here.
She's it.
She's it.
And of course, this book that wow, the people are trying to deny her her destiny.
How dare they deny this first woman who wants to be pre the smartest woman in the world?
How dare they deny her her destiny?
That's the attitude about this.
Well, we'll just we'll just wait and see.
The conventional wisdom has mostly been wrong in the uh on the left and in the mainstream press for decades, and uh there's no reason for that trend to change now, particularly conventional wisdom three and a half years away from the target date.
This is Dennis in Sarasota, Florida.
Hello, Dennis, welcome to the program.
Hey, Russ, thanks for taking my call.
You bet, sir.
Um I uh I thought I'd give you a call.
I I listen to you often, although I don't always agree with you.
I am a Democrat.
And uh I gotta agree with you here that the Democratic Party is being hijacked.
I I it makes me sick to uh hear people like Dick Durbin and Howard Dean and think that they're somehow thinking they're representing the regular guy, you know.
Uh I would uh I would say I'm more of an old school Democrat and don't necessarily agree with everything Bush is doing, but after the last couple months of the things that have been coming out and these Democrats are saying, it just it makes me sick.
I just can't say can I may I ask you a personal question because it r it it it relates to um the way I want to respond to you.
How old are you?
Are you in your thirties or forties?
I'm 33.
You're 33.
All right, because I I've been wondering about this.
Here you have uh the people you talked about, Durban and Dean, but it's not just them.
You've got you've got this mock impeachment bunch on on last Thursday night that tried to charge this administration and this country with anti-Semitism.
Uh or they no, they were being anti-Semitic by saying that there's some deal that we've made with Israel to establish a new outpost in the world for the neocons to run.
Uh and and you've got the Michael Moore movie, and you've got these wacko leftist books, and it's uh I I'm uh but th what it what it means to me is that what people like you are not the mainstream Democrats anymore.
You used to be, but you're not.
Your party, when you say hijacked, it's not just by Howard Dean uh and and people like Durbin.
Uh you've you've got Michael Moore, for all intents and purposes, the official spokesman and philosopher of this party.
You've got moveon dot org and all these George Soros 527 organizations that are that have really taken over the mainstream of this party, and they are really out there on the fringe.
And I've been wondering what old line Democrats who, you know, I mean, Democrats always Democrats like Republicans have, but the the degree of pure personal hatred that they have for Bush that then transcends and sounds like hatred for the country, that's something that's pretty new.
Well, that's that's exactly right.
I mean, it's very clear.
I mean, you don't have to be uh a rocket surgeon here to figure out that what these these people like Durbin and and Dean, the only thing they have on their mind is to discredit Bush.
Now, I'm not a big fan of Bush, but I mean the guy is the president, let him do his job.
You know, we we have to protect our people.
Um, and and they're not coming out with anything positive.
And I think, you know, just to get back to what you were saying, the people the reason that move on.org and and Soros and and uh Michael Moore and all these people have uh taken over as the spokespeople for the Democratic Party because they're the ones with the money.
You know, they're the ones that are are being heard, and I feel like, you know, this just the regular guy.
Well, it's not that it's it's not that they're the ones with the money, it's they're the ones receiving it.
Durbin, Dean, the primary apparently you you can check, you know, if you want to find the mainstream of the Democratic Party or the Republican Party, find out who's contributing to it because that's who the politicians are gonna cater to.
So when you have Durban and Harry Reed and Ted Kennedy and Pelosi and Boxer joining in this cacophony of hatred, you gotta figure out that what they're doing is trying to keep happy those who contributing money to the party.
What it tells me is that the biggest contributors are these people from the fringe, uh, and they have to be kept happy.
You look at Bush, okay, you hate Bush, you hate Bush because of 2000.
That's why they hate Bush.
They think they got an election was stolen in 2000, they haven't gotten over it.
Okay, so Bush is president, you got three and a half years to go.
You're not going to be able to run against Bush again.
And they're still running against Bush.
That's from a political standpoint, that's what's cock eyed to me.
They are running as though Bush is going to be on the ballot again in 2008, and he's not.
Instead, what they ought to be doing is talking about, like you said, what they stand for, what they believe in, and uh at least give some nominal attention to the fact that you like your own country.
But it's hard for them to even do that.
Because they feel like they're selling out their contributors.
If they acting act like they even like their country a little bit, some of their contributors are going to get mad.
If you heard about this thing going on at ground zero, a bunch of leftists have tried to take over the memorial there, and they want to have an actual memorial that doesn't talk about what happened at 9-11 from the right uh perspective.
Their memorial is why it needed to happen, why we caused it, why the people there deserved it.
These are people that want to talk about slavery, the way we treated the uh the Indians and Native Americans.
They want to turn ground zero into a memorial of how rotten this country is, and that's your modern-day Democratic Party.
The people doing this vote Democrats.
You can't separate them out.
They may be ultra-left-wing fringes, but when it comes time to vote, they vote Democrat, they pull that lever for the ass every time they can.
The donkey.
And I'm just telling you, folks, they want to take over the memorial at ground at ground zero, the World Trade Center site in New York, and turn it into a why America deserved it memorial.
And that's why you have so many families of people that died there who are outraged by it.
And of course, New York's not helping things along.
Four years, and there's still nothing but a hole in the ground.
Four years.
It's just, meanwhile, you can't smoke there.
They're taking care of the important things first.
Back after this, don't go away.
It's it's just like uh our last caller, Dennis in Sarasota, Florida, said you don't have to be a rocket surgeon to figure out where the Democratic Party is going these days.
As he said, it ain't rocket surgery.
And he is exactly right, folks.
It's plain as day.
Now, this is interesting.
It's in the Washington Times today.
Former FBI deputy director W. Mark Felt, admitted to being deep throat, should not be allowed to profit for illegally disclosing FBI information to the Washington Post.
This from a former agent who played a critical role in the Watergate investigation.
The uh FBI agent's name is Paul Magalanis.
And he said this guy shouldn't be entitled to blood money.
He's now head of an LA-based security consulting firm.
The former agent said Mark Felt has never apologized for what he did, and his disclosure of confidential FBI information endangered the lives of witnesses vital to the investigation and obstructed an FBI probe.
All of the incriminating facts surrounding President Nixon and his administration would have come out in a normal fashion if not for Felt's actions.
And now he's in line for a one million dollar payoff for his life story, announced last month in a Vanity Fair article that he was the number two FBI official.
He was deep throat.
But according- No, no, no.
I'm sorry, uh former FBI agent Paul Magalani's, but uh or Magalanes, I'm not sure how you pronounce it, but you're terribly wrong.
This man's a hero.
Uh and it's only fair that he earned some money after all Woodward and Bernstein, who were the stenographers on this story, end up with multiple millions.
They wouldn't share even a dime with poor old Felt, and who without uh him, they would have had nothing.
Uh this FBI agents from the old ages, uh dark ages, where there was, you know, concern about screwing up an investigation.
But he's on record as saying that Felt doesn't deserve a dime for this, that he um uh in fact he's calling it blood money, uh, and he should not be allowed to profit because what he did was illegal.
We'll be back after this.
Stay with us.
By the way, folks, I'm told that this law firm out in Seattle that actually secured permission for people like Delay to be uh have their trips paid for by lobbyists if they were reimbursed, Preston Gates and Ellis.
I'm told that the Gates in this uh Seattle law firm is uh William Gates Sr.
The uh father of Bill Gates of uh of Microsoft.
Just a little interesting tidbit to pass on.
Ditto Cam is coming up in the next hour.
See you shortly.
▲
Export Selection