All Episodes
Previous Next
June 22, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:40
June 22, 2005, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
No.
It was not resign.
No.
I will not resign.
Kofi Annan speaks for Dick Durbin and the Democrat Party.
Greetings.
And welcome back, ladies and gentlemen.
Rush Limbaugh, America's anchor man, America's truth detector, America's play-by-playman of the news.
From the distinguished and prestigious Limbaugh Institute for advanced conservative studies.
I promise we will get to your phone calls in this hour.
Our podcasting continues.
Club Git Mall open at the uh rushlimbaugh.com.
Actually, the we've we've got a brochure there for Club Getmo if you want to check in.
If you're a jihadist looking for some R, you'll enjoy the amenities and the whole layout of the place.
As well as the Club Gitmo gift shop, in addition to four t-shirts, we've added uh Club Gitmo Cap and uh Club Gitmo Coffee Mug, Java jihad, uh, or Zihad Java.
Uh it's all there uh at www.rushlimbaugh.com.
Telephone number.
If you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882.
The uh email address is rush at EIB net.com.
I just want to explain the media angle in all of this, this Durban business, as well as if you missed the first hour, it's too bad.
Can't repeat the whole thing, but uh you gotta find a way to get it.
If you're a podcaster, it'll be easy.
Uh if not, you will be uh you'll be able to access it, certain aspects of it at Rush Limbaugh.com when we uh update the site later this afternoon to reflect the contents of today's show.
It's kind of like what's happening here with this Ed Klein book.
It's exactly what I predicted is happening.
The media is creating a backlash about this book before the book even comes out.
The book came out yesterday.
This Klein guy's having a tough time getting on TV for any interviews.
The press is not curious about what he's saying, or circling the wagons trying to defend Hillary, but in addition to that, and this is where the similarity of the Durban business comes in, in addition to that, a whole bunch of conservative pundits are out there in a race to see who can be first to impress the mainstream media that they are not right-wing wekos.
Hey, I don't abide this book, they don't lump me in with Limbaugh and those other guys.
And I haven't said a word about the book.
One little reference two weeks ago.
Uh the contents of the book are irrelevant to me at this point, because I'm gonna tell you what's gonna happen, folks.
It doesn't matter what the book says.
The book is gonna make Hillary even bigger.
The book is gonna turn her in the the way this culture works, she's gonna become an even bigger celebrity.
She's gonna become a bigger star out of all of this.
Whatever's in the book is irrelevant because the press is not going to care to look into it as as if it were a book about me or Tom Delay or Bill Frist or George W. Bush or anybody, any other conservative.
If it were a book about one of us, man, oh man, it wouldn't be circling any wagons.
Uh, and probably a bunch of conservative pundits would be joining the media and saying, oh, this is serious allegations.
We need to look into this.
Because there's a certain element of the conservative punditry that lives and works in Washington, and they don't want to be thought of as anything other than Uber intellectuals.
They don't want to be thought of as reactionary right-wingers.
And so they're in a race here to see which one of them can be first to the finish line to show people in the mainstream press that they have grown and that they they don't like what's happening in this Hillary book at all.
Certain pundits, media outlets on our side, trying to establish their own objectivity and credentials with the left, not with the American people, by pouncing on this book.
But it never works.
Folks, it never works unless you keep it up, like John McCain does.
McCain, if if he didn't make a career out of going on TV and savaging Republicans, they wouldn't love him.
But he can't just do it once because you do it once.
You're not going to impress the left, because in the liberal mind, conservatives are always going to be like Dick Durbin believes, Nazis, Stalinists, and Communists.
That's what the Lib thinks of us.
And nothing we can do because I ought to run a test for one week.
I don't think you all have put up with it, even if you knew in advance.
I ought to become one of these conservatives that I'm talking about.
Just for a week, just for a week.
And and just see if it if it created any love and adoration.
Hey, what's going on with Limbaugh?
Any praise From leftist quarters.
You don't know how often I've been tempted to try this.
The only reason I don't is because I don't think you all would put up with it, even if you were in on the joke.
Because you'd yeah, yeah, we'd have to alert the affiliates because it all hell would.
I mean, when I endorsed Clinton back in 92, we nearly lost some radio stations, and I nearly had to couple cancel a couple appearances on the Rush to Excellence tour.
Because people wanted tearing up their tickets and wanting their money back, you know, before I'd even shown up.
So it it would be, it would be a risk.
But for example, do you think John McCain's the only prisoner of war from Vietnam?
You think he's the only member of the United States Senate has any experience as a prisoner of war?
Yet McCain is the only POW the Lib Media gives any attention to.
They haven't gone to talk to Sam Johnson or Jeremiah Denton or scores of other POWs about Gitmo or any of it.
Only McCain, because McCain serves their purposes.
A Lib Media didn't ask George Allen or Jeff Sessions or John Kyle or anybody else what they thought of Durbin's so-called apology, because these are mainstream conservative Republicans whose answers the mainstream press would not like.
And they wouldn't be able to write their story if they went out and got comments.
But I if it, like in Trent Watts apology, bamboo, every liberal group and even an ex-governor Ma Richards was contacted.
Then Quizium Fume and then a Congressional Black Caucus and then Maxine Waters and then the uh Reverend Docs and everybody else under the sun, including McCain.
What did you think of McKe's apology?
They go on and ask everybody on the right on the when the when the when some guy on the right steps in it, man, they want everybody on the left to react to it.
I haven't seen one story where they've gone around and asked any Republican.
What do you think of Durban's apology?
Likewise, I haven't seen anybody in the mainstream press go ask anybody but McCain.
What do you think of Durbin's Gitmo analogy?
They didn't even take Mayor Daly's comments and seek input from any of the 44 Democrats and the two independents in the Senate and ask them if they share his view.
Yeah, Daly say what he said yesterday.
Did you see the press go, Senator Senator Reed?
What do you think of what Mayor Daly said today about Senator Durbin?
Uh Senator Kennedy, did you hear what Mayor Daly said?
You didn't see this, did you?
And you won't see it.
And you know why you didn't see it?
Because it wouldn't lend itself to the story that they want to write.
Because the media is trying to influence policy and debate not only by what they report, but how they report and what they don't report.
Now, you take a look at this book.
Go back to this Klein book.
Here you've got a book by a guy that used to be the editor of the New York Times Sunday magazine and an editor at Newsweek.
He's got great liberal credentials, the media circling the wagons, trying to destroy this book before anybody's ever read it, not doing one bit of investigative journalism on their own into it, not curious about anything that might be in it.
And yet Michael Moore can put together the most outrageously incorrect demagogic film called a documentary and the media Ooh, what's this?
We've got to dig deep.
What is more found here?
And we've got it, and then we got we've got to get more in here.
We got to talk to him about this.
We've got to ask him what this is all about.
We've got to amplify this.
Or some half-baked liberal comedian will write a book that's factually incorrect and will get six months of mileage out of it.
And then they'll run around and they'll ask Republicans, what do you think of the Michael Moore movie?
What do you have to say, Congressman X about that charge?
And what do you have to say about the allegation in that part of the movie, Senator X?
It just but the Swift boat vets come out, circle the wagons, destroy the swift boat vets, attack the messenger.
At any rate, we are different in the Democrats.
Uh our friends will say, so we should never embrace somebody like a Michael Moore or whatever.
But Joe Klein is just an author.
Why trash him, or not Joe Klein, but Ed Klein?
He's just an author.
Why trash him with such intensity unless motivated by self-promotion with the libs?
He's just an author, but boy, this guy's got to be destroyed.
Michael Moore hoisted, elevated, sitting at the right hand of Jimmy, the Earl Carter at the Democrat convention.
Here comes Ed Klein.
He's never going to get another cocktail invitation at Tina Brown's house.
He's going to be a persona non grata.
Liz Smith syndicated columns will single-handedly destroy this guy with columns and questions.
How could he do this?
What happened to what happened to Ed Klein, who used to do such good work?
And there'll be questions raised about are there emotional problems?
Are there other problems we don't know about?
Did maybe he get funding from Richard Mellon Scave.
All this rot gut that you can predict.
Just an author, but he's being trashed with such intensity.
He's written books about the Kennedys.
Why didn't our folks trash him for that?
He's written a lot of books about the Kennedys, folks, and I don't remember the conservative punditry being the first in line to say, I just disavow.
I can't believe I don't want anybody to think that I had anything to do with this book.
And I don't support this book.
Why now?
He's he's he's really savage the Kennedys this guy has.
But now it's Hillary, the next Queen.
The next president of the United States.
I and I'm not defending him, folks.
I'm just talking to you about I don't even know him.
I'm just talking by this is how I observe things.
It's just it's so stark you can't help but notice it.
I am poking at those who are taking cheap shots.
I don't view Mrs. Clinton as a victim.
My God, she's at the top of the big leagues in all this.
She knows what this is all about.
She should be able to defend herself, but she's not even half she didn't even have to defend herself.
She's got the whole mainstream press apparatus out there circling the wagons around her and making sure that she didn't even get touched, not even asking her for a comment about it.
And from our side, just my perspective, the attacks on this Klein guy from the conservative sign seem way out of proportion to me.
Imagine, imagine if Gary Aldrich's book came out now.
Imagine, I wonder if I wonder if conservatives would start trashing him.
But there's and here's here's an FBI agent.
Hello, Mark Felt, Gary Aldrich working in the White House.
Here's what I saw going on in there with Bill Clinton.
Shh, the clause came out.
And Gary Aldrich had to be destroyed and discredited as an FBI agent.
At any rate, I gotta run uh a little long here.
We'll come back and start it with your phone calls right after this.
Don't go anywhere.
Okay, let's go to the phones.
Uh we'll start in uh in Columbus, Ohio, the home of Little League Baseball cheats.
Mike, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
How are you doing, Rush?
Just fine, sir.
Thank you.
Good, good.
I listen to you constantly, even though I consider myself more of an independent and less right or left than anything.
I was just calling, I called Durbin's office, and I told him that he shouldn't apologize.
Well, I told somebody on his staff.
I agree with you.
I agree with you.
I really don't believe he was insulting the troops.
I believe he was insulting the situation of uh a memo, an FBI memo.
And his words.
Well, no, you're wrong about that.
No, he read the FBI memo and and then and then which was a description he said of what was going on down there.
Then he did compare that to you can't deny that, but I don't think he should have apologized either, because he meant it.
I don't I don't think people who mean what they say should apologize for saying it.
Well, my actually didn't he didn't apologize, Mike.
He apologized for his feelings were hurt, but he didn't apologize for saying it.
So you ought to you you're okay on this.
Well, I'm just saying my idea is that he, you know, if you're gonna if you're gonna condemn him, you should condemn Santorum for using the same, you know, rhetoric and Melman for you using the same rhetoric.
Uh Santorum, uh, you mean his uh Adolf Hitler reference talking about uh Democrats and their Nazi-like uh uh filibusters?
Yeah, pretty much.
Yeah.
Uh well Santorum basically did what Durbin did.
Uh Santorum said he meant no offense uh by referring to Hitler while defending the GOP's right to ban judicial filibusters as Senate leaders prepare to s uh start a countdown Friday to a vote on the so-called uh nuclear option, referencing Hitler was meant to dramatize the principle of an argument not to characterize my Democrat colleague, Santorum said.
So uh he clarified and apologized.
Gulags and poll pot and Hitler was meant to, you know, make an analogy to the book.
That's exactly right.
He was he was he was comparing what goes on at our prisons to what went on in those gulags, death camps, and uh killing fields.
That that's why I don't think he should apologize.
That we that's what see Mike, you and I really agree.
That's what Durbin thinks.
That's what he really thinks.
Um and given his apology, are we now to also think that he did not mean it when he insulted Republicans all last week or were mischaracterizing him on this?
Uh and saying it was Republicans' fault that the problem was even uh as big as it was because they were amplifying what he said.
Uh is is he is he now admitting that he didn't mean any of that either?
I don't think so.
So No, I I I I think they all should be held, their feet should all be held to the fire when they make outlandish statements.
But uh I just think we ought to be a little more fair of the.
Well, that's true, but you know, the in in this case, you you remember Trent Lott, I mean, he was not only held to the fire, he was thrown in it.
Uh and and Durban here wasn't even allowed to skip over the uh the hot coals wearing some Birkin stocks.
Me being African American, I didn't mind Trent Lott being thrown in the fire.
I thought that was a terrible thing to say.
Uh you you didn't mind Trent Lott being Yeah, see, well, everybody's got their own biases.
Everybody's got their own axes to grind.
You probably think as an African American that was worse than what Durbin said here about the country.
Well, no, I I just I disagree.
I don't think it was worse.
I just think, you know, as as a leader in the Senate, you know, I don't think Durban.
Well, but no, but wait a minute.
Now, Mike, you just said you thought Durban uh Lott should have been thrown in the fire, but you don't think I agree with that.
And the reason I don't agree with Durbin fan it or what uh what Durbin did because he didn't attack anyone.
You know, he did I I don't think he attacked the country.
Wait a minute.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding.
Are you saying Lot should not have been thrown in the fire or should have been?
No, I disagree totally with what Lot said when he said that it what he said in a birthday.
Okay, so you agree with Lott being thrown in the fire for it.
No, I just I think Trent Lott used a horrible choice of words that offended a lot of African Americans.
I think the only reason this offended African uh Americans would Durban said is because it's been drummed up so tough that he was attacking the troops.
Yeah.
Well, I guess it depends on the uh the the vantage point you come into this with uh you as an African American, you know, I I can understand why you think Lott would be far worse than what Durbin said here.
I I don't myself think there's any comparison uh because Lott, I don't think actually meant it.
I think everybody knows what Lott was doing.
He's just trying to praise some old coot who may not even understand what he's hearing anymore.
He was near a hundred years old, Strom Thurman, he was leaving.
It was just you you go to a birthday party and you praise the other just a way of complimenting Strom and trying to make him feel good here in his remaining days.
It was, you know, Lott didn't go to Florida Senate like Durbin did and make the case for segregation, and the country's gone on the wrong tracks because the Klan was defeated.
No, he didn't do that.
Durbin went to the floor of the Senate to do all this stuff.
He was just an innocent little remark at a birthday party, and man, uh I'm just telling you the differences.
He apologized five times, Mike, and the Democrats never accepted it.
They didn't accept the apology.
They didn't stop until the president of the United States got involved and saw to it that Trent Lott had to be dethroned as the Republican leader in the Senate.
There's just a difference in the way the two parties operate.
I'm glad you called, O Mike.
Thanks.
Um thanks so much.
Here's a story from the Raleigh News and Record.
I think it's Raleigh.
This is just mind-boggling.
Greensboro, North Carolina.
The decision by local court officials to deny the use of the Koran for oaths has garnered national media attention and the scrutiny of a Washington-based Islamic civil rights group.
Officials with the Council on American Islamic Relations said yesterday that statements by Guilford County's top judge seemed to endorse a particular religion and could be a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Guilford's senior resident Superior Court Judge W. Douglas Albright told the newspaper last week that an oath taken on the Quran is not a loafful off or a lawful oath, a lawful oath under North Carolina law.
The law refers to laying one's hand on the holy scriptures.
Everybody understands what the holy scriptures are, the judge said, and if they don't, we're in a mess.
So the uh uh Council on American Islamic relations all upset, claiming this is a violation of the U.S. Constitution.
Let me ask you people a question.
Before September 11th, how often did you hear about the Koran, the radio or the news?
Before September 11th.
But now, since people who follow that religion have killed three thousand Americans in the most horrid manner.
We as a society seems to me have done nothing but jump through hoops, bend over backwards, grab our ankles to appease, cajole, and allow these people to change the fundamentals of our country.
To the point that we have an American publication newsweek writing stories of not true about the desecration of the Quran.
They couldn't care less what anybody did to a Bible anywhere.
If they never saw a Bible at Newsweek, they'd be happy.
But you let the Quran be destroyed.
Before 9-11, nothing.
After 9-11, after, after, after 3,000 of us are killed by members of this religion.
We're bending over backwards and forwards and grabbing the ankles and making sure we don't offend them.
And now they're trying to say in the American court system, they're not going to swear on the Bible.
You got to swear on the Koran.
And here we are.
We're back halfway through here, folks, the fastest three hours in the media.
We are up and running on the ditto cam at rushlimbaugh.com.
Here is Steve in Lanexa, Kansas, outside Kansas City.
Hello.
How are you doing, Rush?
This is a real honor to talk to you.
I'm a teacher, so I can't listen to you during the school year, but over the summer break, I get to listen to you more.
So thanks so much for taking my call.
You bet, sir.
Um I understand your reasoning for showing the differences and the media and their bias and how they accept some people's apologies and don't accept others' apologies.
But to be honest, the best course of action here, take the high road, accept Durban's apology, and move on.
Um, and I'm a teacher, I you know, a lot of times, you know, I I'm and I don't mean to be insulting Rush, but you know, what you're doing right now is well, they don't accept uh Trent Lott's apology.
That's a lot like, you know, when I'm um uh teaching kids and they don't uh some another kid says, well, well, they don't do it, or they're doing something wrong, so I guess we can too.
Take the high road, accept his apology, even if you don't like the way you worded it, and move on.
And and as a side note that's why George Bush is such an effective leader.
I I would bet you, a coke, he's not going to get into this.
He takes the high road, and that's why he's so effective.
I know he's not gonna get into it because he won't have to get into it because other people carry the water for him.
He won't have to say a word about this because whatever he might think or say is going to be stated by others in a prominent position.
So it won't matter.
I'm not, I'm not this is not a hey, look at what they did.
And I'm not gonna let him get away.
I'm simply pointing out this is a program of education and information people.
And, you know, this is this is not just about he stole my book or he stole my snow cone, I'm gonna steal his.
It's not about conflict resolution as it would be taught in the schools.
This is about the nation, it's future.
We have two um uh competing ideologies for how best to shape this country for the future.
And it is a war.
It is a battle.
And all I'm trying to do is inform and educate as many people how the two sides in this battle play the game in Washington, D.C. There's a little context here, Steve.
Republicans are already a little impatient because for the last 40 or 50 years, we've been doing exactly what we were told to do.
We have been educating people, we have been getting them to the votes, to the polls, they have been voting on specific issues, and after all this time of working hard and informing and educating people, we finally elected majorities.
And now the majorities in the White House and in the Senate and the House, uh, mostly in the Senate, don't want to act like they run the place.
Uh they don't want to act like they're in charge.
They they don't implement the agenda that the people that voted for them thought they were gonna vote, uh thought they were gonna do, implement.
Uh so, you know, people little fit to be tied.
There's a lot of things that are making people mad.
Immigration's a big one that nobody's paying much attention to in Washington.
Uh but the way Republicans continually get beat up, this Durban thing is not inconsequential.
Durbin just didn't insult Republicans, he insulted the military, insulted the whole country.
And I don't think he should apologize, and I'm not in a contest here to see, you know, who does it better, who does it right, who plays hardball the best.
I'm just showing people.
I I'm I it's all I'm trying to do here.
I'm not suggesting that people don't accept his apology.
Couldn't care less if people do or don't.
I don't, but I don't, because I don't think he means the apology.
I think he means what he said.
So his apology to me is irrelevant.
Uh but if it make you feel better, fine, he apologize.
We're moving on here.
We're continuing to move on by keeping this in perspective.
But the the uh the idea here that that uh uh this is not taking the high road, uh I'm trying to demonstrate who's on the high road, and I'm trying to demonstrate who's on a low road uh and how and why.
And it's up to people who listen to agree or disagree with me.
But in terms of uh accepting his apology, a, I don't think he should have apologized because I don't think he means the apology.
Secondly, I don't think he has apologized.
I think he's apologized for offending people, but he didn't apologize for the words that he used.
Uh Knut in Columbia, South Carolina, welcome to the program, sir.
Great to have you with us.
How are you doing, Mr. Lumba?
Let me you're dead on.
You're absolutely correct.
This guy didn't apologize to me or any of my brothers or sisters in arms.
He doesn't care about us.
He cares about his little political agenda and moving forward with that, and and yet all these people out there like Mike and this teacher from you know they they don't get it because it's not them he's talking about.
Now, if he had he said something about them, whether it was African American or or being something about teachers, then they'd be all up in arms, and how could he have said that?
And they would not accept a non-apology.
I don't accept his apology.
Why should I?
I mean, he didn't apologize.
You're right.
He said exactly what he meant.
He did.
I I I know I've been saying that all along.
I mean, he needs to stand by it.
We know that that's what he meant.
He meant to say folks, that was a statement.
He wrote that out.
That wasn't something ad-lib.
There was thought uh went into what Durbin said.
Uh and the apology here is simply asking you to uh forgive uh him for offending you, but he didn't take the uh words back.
Look, I don't I uh uh I'm glad to talk to you all about this.
Don't misunderstand here, but I'm I'm not trying to dwell on it uh for uh any reason other than illustrate what people think about this.
And I I'm just it's it's become a big bugaboo with me uh lately over over how people who win majorities somehow surrender them and give them away and don't have the fortitude to act uh you know you when you're in a when you're in a fight, when you're in a war, you know, battle or whatever, it's safe to say that the aggressor sets the rules.
And you know, you can say, well, the rule book says you can't do that, but if somebody violates the rule book, there's no referee here other than the voters.
And you know, taking the high road, yeah, Bush can take the high road, and he probably should, but he doesn't, you know, he has the he has the benefit of other people uh articulating uh positions.
Presidents never do get involved in this except the way he got involved in the uh Trent Lott situation.
At any rate, uh who's next?
Delane in uh Memphis.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Uh, thanks for taking my call.
I appreciate very much your analysis of the Durban uh pseudo-apology.
Um what I wanted to say is that uh hopefully I can add something to it, is that there's there's two sides to an analogy.
And uh by what Durbin said, if in fact Gitmo and what's happening there, it's like what happened in Cambodia under Pol Pot in the former Soviet Union or or in Nazi Germany, then those uh uh crimes that were committed there must have not been very heinous after all.
And I think that's what most defends the sensibilities of at least some on the left, particularly the latter one.
Anything that diminishes the seriousness of the Holocaust makes him squirm, properly so.
But Durban's only correcting by apology, such as it was, only one side of the analogy.
What's most offensive to me and and I'm sure you and others on the right is that what's left standing is that a U.S. Senator has suggested, no more than that, he's asserted that Americans in general and American soldiers in particular would participate in crimes on the scale of Pol Pot in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany.
And for that, he has not made an apology or corrected the record.
Exactly right.
Exactly, and it does stand because Nancy Pelosi over in the House is demanding an investigation of it.
And I might add a whole bunch of Republicans who want to get favorable Press treatment in Washington are joining in that suggestion.
Ardle Inspector and others are suggesting that maybe Congress needs to look into what's going on down there based on these allegations.
Allegations of whose.
So, yeah, it does stand.
The whole the whole concept that Dick Durbin uh uh announced of what goes on down there still stands.
He didn't say I was wrong.
He didn't say I take back my words.
He simply said, Look, uh I'm gonna keep speaking my mind.
I'm sorry if it offends you.
Uh meanwhile, uh people have gone down there and they report that it's nothing like at all what the media and others are trying to state that it is.
The uh inmates at Camp X-ray, which is which is where the uh terrorists and the prisoners are being held, are gaining weight.
They're being fed so well they're gaining weight.
Have a story here by uh by George Whitman in the American Spectator.
He enlisted in the Army in December 1950, is a member of the Committee on the Present Danger, and was the founding chairman of the National Institute for Public Policy.
He says, what could be worse than Gitmo?
Well, for those of us, and there are millions who have gone through U.S. Army basic training or Marine Corps boot camp, the complaints of Senator Durbin regarding the treatment of prisoners at Gitmo are laughable.
One wonders what Durbin and the folks at Amnesty International would say if their little darlings had been forced to stand at attention in a hundred degree heat for two or more hours at Fort Jackson or Camp Lejeune in full combat gear with sixty pounds of ammo and equipment waiting for a general inspection.
What time did you get up, soldier?
The inspecting officer invariably asks.
The answer is always the same revely, sir.
As long as you said that, you didn't have to admit that you and your buddies have been up for thirty-six hours straight.
GIing the barracks, the company street, your weapons and everything that moved or stood in the area.
Drop down and give me twenty, thirty-fifty, the training cadre would demand, and the shaved head recruit falls to the ground and completes his push-ups, sometimes to the point of exhaustion for those not in top condition.
The heel of the corporal on your back tends to make the task a bit more difficult.
Gosh, we should have had some of those ACLU lawyers when we were at boot camp.
Another fine element of training occurs when a drill sergeant's mouth is so close to yours that his shout spits saliva till it runs down your face.
One flinch brings an order for thirty perfect push-ups or an evening of jogging around the company area with a rifle held with both hands above one's head while the miscreant shouts the general orders.
Definitely too tough for those unfortunate terrorists to do.
Senator Durbin, whose biography shows he spent the Vietnam War in law school, knows nothing of an American soldier's training life.
And we're talking about only those first eight weeks of basic training, not the far tougher regimen for Ranger, SEAL, Recon or Special Forces.
He says he's appalled the Gitmo terrorists would had to sit or stand in stress positions while under interrogation.
Well, what about crawling into and cleaning out an eight-foot-deep grease pit attached to each mess hall?
That's a nice little punishment for arriving late to formation.
Or what about a 25-mile march with a full field pack, your weapon and ammo, and only one canteen of water.
Senator Durbin is deeply worried about the impression that is caused internationally when a terrorist prisoner complains that his space has been invaded by a female interrogator.
Oh dear me.
Did that female make the poor prisoner feel badly?
An American soldier yearns for such intimidation.
A recruit has no space.
He or she is government property.
From what type of mental illness does Senator Durbin suffer?
What country has Durbin been inhabiting?
From what planet does this civilian feather merchant come?
Senator, don't insult the hundreds of thousands of on-duty servicemen and women and the millions of veterans by your politically inspired pedophiling complaints.
Perhaps Senator Durbin doesn't understand what it takes to be an American soldier or a Marine.
Perhaps he thinks the families of the terrorists should be thought of before the families of the victims of 911, or those of our fallen warriors.
He speaks of Guantanamo as an embarrassment, but it is he who embarrasses those who have served.
You don't have to look far in this country.
You don't even have to go to basic training.
Define circumstances where Americans have a tougher day than these prisoners down at Gitmo.
But folks, there's something else about this, and it it goes back to the story I just shared with you out of North Carolina.
Uh about how uh Muslims now demanding uh the Quran instead of the Bible to uh you know swear the oath on, take the oath on in court.
And I just I'm telling you, I just want to reiterate once again.
Uh before 9-11, the only uh the I thought about it here since the last time I said this, and before 9-11, the only time I can remember hearing the Quran invoked was by Calypso Lewis, calling it the holy Quran.
We didn't hear about it.
We didn't hear about it in the radio or the news, we didn't have Newsweek in Time and the New York Times writing about the Quran.
But take 9-11, 3,000 Americans are killed by followers of that book.
And all we've done is jump through hoops and bend over backwards and grab our ankles to make sure we don't offend them.
And that's what Gitmo is.
That's what Gitmo.
We cannot offend these people.
It's just I sometimes when you when I when I throw away all the jocularity associated with this, and when I really think about it, it's maddening.
It really is maddening.
We'll be back in just a second.
I'm a little long here in this segment.
Don't go away.
I have to admit I love this song.
The lyrics are dumb, but uh it's it's uh still a good song.
Everyday people sly in a family stone.
The White House uh yesterday rebuffed Democratic calls for creation of an independent commission to investigate the detainee abuses at Gitmo.
Democrats said an independent commission was needed because of questions about the integrity of the Pentagon's investigations, and to prove to the Muslim world the U.S. had nothing to hide.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan's uh countered that the uh Department of Defense has taken these issues head on and addressed them.
They continue to look into allegations of abuse, people are being held to account.
We think that's the way to go about this.
The uh Democrats said that they had 170 sponsors for their legislation, the Gitmo investigation, all in the House.
Nancy Pelosi said she believed enough House Republicans would cross the aisle to pass the measure if the Republican leadership allowed a vote.
So here's here's Durban supposedly apologizing.
And uh now the Democrats demand an investigation of what's going on down there.
And here come the Republicans.
Uh folks, uh New York Times today, despite opposition for the White House, some Republicans have begun to join Congressional Democrats in calling for an independent commission to review accusations of abuse by prisoners by American forces in Guantanamo Bay.
Uh the idea's appeal has grown in recent weeks, uh, with Republican endorsements from uh, among others, Bob Barr, a former congressman from Georgia, Senator Lindsay Graham of South Carolina, uh let's see.
Graham said that he had until now resisted the idea of congressional action to review issues related to prisoner abuse, but he said the uproar related to the latest accusations of abuse at Gitmore had convinced him we've uh we've crossed the point where uh that isn't uh worth the working anymore.
He said the U.S. needed to prove to the world we are a rule of law nation.
Uh why if Durban apologized, and if everybody's accepting his apology, and everybody's assuming he apologized because he was wrong, why are we doing this?
So that Pelosi suggests something, and you can count on it.
Here come some Republicans to help out.
The minute the White House says we're not gonna do this, uh uh uh couldn't do what in the current house?
Uh well, no, he's not in the house.
Lindsey Graham's not in the house, but but he's this is gonna serve to apply pressure to people in the house.
Uh Lindsey Graham's getting great press coverage over this.
This was the New York Times.
Everybody who wants great press coverage in um in Washington.
Well, some don't.
I mean, some don't care about it.
But nevertheless, here, folks, I mean, uh you see what we've got this massive apology out there, everybody accepts it.
Now we can move on to going down there and find out what's really going on.
We've had enough allegations.
We've got what allegations?
The allegation have we had allegations from Newsweek that were wrong, and we've got allegations from Dick Durbin.
There we are.
But you know what, folks?
We're gonna take the highway.
And be right back and go earn some money at the EIB Profit Center timeout.
An independent commission on Gidmo, huh?
Why why didn't we have an independent commission on uh White House abuse of the interns?
Or White House abuse of women who uh came forward to allege that they had been abused by a sitting president.
Why why do we get any commissions investigating that, huh?
We did rush to it.
It's called impeachment.
No, that was not about that, folks.
You think it was, but it wasn't.
▲
Export Selection