All Episodes
Previous Next
June 29, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:19
June 29, 2005, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi.
How are you?
Great to be with you, ladies and gentlemen.
This thrill.
It is an honor.
It is a pure delight.
Be able to come before you each day and uh speak with you from behind the golden EIB microphone here at the distinguished Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies about these issues and problems that matter so much to our future.
If you want to be part of the program, it's uh 800-282-2882, the email address rush at EIB net.com.
All right.
The uh Limbaugh Letter PDF file is up from July 2004, two full pages of documented evidence of ties and links between Al Qaeda and the regime of Saddam Hussein.
In addition, we have added a link to our uh Saddam Hussein stack of stuff, which is in our essential stack of stuff.
Now the essential stack of stuff is is just a small portion of the encyclopedia of knowledge and data that is available at Rushlinbaugh.com.
Uh dozens of links on Saddam and Al-Qaeda in our website, Saddam Stack of Stuff.
It's all at the top of the page, and we have uh we've made it free.
The essential stack of stuff is for subscribers, but the Saddam Stack of stuff in the Essential Stack is now free.
And the two pages in Limbaugh letter there.
Since the Democrats keep rallying around this, it's um it's time to keep focusing uh people on facts about this.
And as you'll note when you go to Rush Limbaugh.com, you will see that we have also included a picture of uh one of the planes attacking the uh World Trade Center.
It is a still shot, but it is there.
In another laugher, this is from the French news agency, and this is the kind of the you know the the the press template is is just uh predictable as it can be, and it's getting to the point, and it's it's what I think is happening to liberals all over the place.
They keep being rejected.
They keep ending up in the minority, they keep losing as they keep hammering their talking points.
And as those talking points are rejected and not accepted, and don't end up persuading people, they just keep hammering it again and again and again, only what would you say, worse and worse and worse.
Here's the headline, ladies and gentlemen.
U.S. suspected of keeping secret prisoners on warships.
This according to the UN.
The UN has learned of very, very serious allegations that the United States is secretly detaining terrorism suspects in various locations around the world, notably aboard prison ships.
This according to the United Nations Special Reporter on Terrorism.
While the accusations were rumors, reporter Manfred Nowak said the situation was sufficiently serious to merit an official inquiry.
Oh, we're back to this.
There is no evidence.
It's simply a rumor.
But the charge is so serious.
That the nature of the evidence is irrelevant.
Why, this is such a serious charge, we must investigate it.
The Austrian UN official told the French news agency, these are very, very, very serious accusations.
The U.S. is maintaining secret camps, notably on ships, adding that the vessels were believed to be in the Indian Ocean region.
Now these are only rumors, but they appear sufficiently well based to merit an official inquiry.
Last Thursday, Manfred Nolak and three other UN human rights experts said that they were opening an inquiry into the U.S. detention camp at Club Gitmo, where Washington has been holding more than 500 people without trial.
The U.S. has neither refused nor granted requests by NOAAC's group to visit uh Club Gitmo.
So if they won't let it go, it's Abu Grab.
It's they just will not let it go.
From the Christian Science Monitor today.
A majority of Americans think the country's on the wrong track with the war in Iraq, the most frequently cited cause for concern, but that discontent has not translated into gains for the Democratic Party, something that worries Many within the party.
Democratic strategist James Carville said between bites of gumbo, the country's just in a foul mood.
He cited a new poll from Democracy Corps, in which 56% of Americans say the country is headed in the wrong direction.
Democracy Corps provides public opinion polling and strategic advice to Democrats.
It was confounded by uh or co-founded by Carvel and Stanley Greeberg.
The latest Democracy Corpse survey was conducted June 20th through 26th.
Found that Democrats are not doing very well either.
Some 43% of voters said they had warm feelings about Republicans, while only 38% had positive feelings about Democrats.
Republicans did weaken in this poll, but it shows Democrats weakening more, said Stanley Greenberg, and he attributes the decline to voters' perception that Democrats have no core set of convictions or point of view.
By the way, there's good economic news out today.
It's way up.
Consumer confidence is up, and there's some other statistic.
And it it first quarter, oh, that's right, first quarter GDP was revised up to 3.8% growth.
And uh this is just gonna confound uh all these people uh who are sitting around hoping and praying that everybody's miserable.
The liberals are miserable.
Have you ever been around them?
Have you been around liberals when politics comes up?
They are miserable.
These people are wound so tight they just you can set them off.
It's like lighting a firecracker with a word.
And I just I you know I don't want to go through life being this miserable, but they want everybody to be miserable with them, and so they're trying to spread the misery here.
They they're incapable of being optimistic.
Or uplifting or um or inspiring.
Washington Post today, Dan Balls of the Washington Post, lessons of September 11th again take center stage, and it's this news story about how the president has had to go in time 9-11 to this.
How dare he do this?
It's how how dare he bring up these memories, those poor families, how dare the president do this.
This is just unconscionable.
The link between 9-11 and Iraq, boy, that's how can he do it?
But if you read all the way to the end of the article, in fact, if you get to the last paragraph, you'll find this.
The fact that the public continues to support keeping troops in Iraq has made Democratic Party efforts to criticize Bush more difficult, as few Democrat leaders are calling for an explicit exit strategy.
But it is Congressional Republicans who may be most worried now about the course of events in Iraq.
They not Bush must face the voters next year, and they will become leading indicators of how effective the president has been in persuading American state of course.
C. Proving my point, it ain't the left and the media that we need to be concerned about.
It's these renegade mavericks out there trying to make a name for themselves and get constant style section profiles in the Washington Post.
But nevertheless, it is mentioned at the very end of the story that the Democrats public uh support for this.
It just makes it hard and hard and harder for them to criticize President and call for an explicit exit strategy, especially after the numbers from last night.
Now, I also want to make a prediction about that.
It's quite natural after the president gave a gangbuster speech that the flash polling that night would show big gains.
Give it a week, they'll do the poll again, they'll show that as opposed to 70% gung-ho, it'll be down to 55 or whatever, and they'll say Bush has lost 15 points or whatever it is, and they'll make a big deal out of it.
So just remember that uh that that's that that's gonna happen.
Uh we also have uh story here in the Washington Post by Glenn Kessler and Robin Wright.
Uh they hated the speech, they despised the speech, but at the end, you do read about all the accomplishments in Iraq.
Uh and after the speech on CNN, even uh, which has come in for a lot of criticism.
I got a lot of emails from people about CNN's post-speech analysis.
I didn't see it, but apparently it was just over the top Bush bashing, no matter no matter who it was talking, guest host, whatever.
But somebody said that uh after a speech on CNN, there was one reporter who said that unquestionably things have improved, but we still got to get out, and uh and so forth.
So try as they might, uh, folks, they're having a they're having a tough time uh burying some of the good news.
I gotta take a quick time out.
We'll do that and be back.
Your phone calls and more audio sound bites coming up right after this.
You know, these backlashes are funny things, folks.
We've heard about the backlash to Ed Klein's book, uh, the Hillary Clinton book, and we've heard about how it's all a conservative book and the conservatives are behind this, but there's a huge backlash, and some conservatives don't even want anything to do with it, blah, blah.
And we've also heard that Hillary and her acolytes have been calling uh the network saying, You don't grant this guy an interview.
This guy does not get an interview.
If you want access to me, you don't talk to Ed Klein, right?
And so they're gonna kill the book, right?
Well, at book scan, it's scanning number two right now.
It has it's it's probably its first week on the New York Times list going to be in top five.
So my question is, if they've killed the book, and if there's there's huge backlash and Klein can't get on television, he's getting interview opportunities canceled, then who's buying the book?
And who's reading the book?
How can this possibly be?
How can anybody sell a book without going on the Today Show?
How can anybody sell a book without going on Good Morning America?
How can anybody sell a book without going on CNN or PMSNBC?
And by the way, I thought the Clintons were gonna put the kibosh on this book.
And I thought the backlash against this book was gonna bury this book.
This book is gonna show up the top five of the New York Times list, folks.
As a friend of mine uh is wont say, um, they can't stop excrement no more.
They doesn't say it that way, but they may think they can stop stuff, and they may think they can bottle stuff up, and the networks may think that they can kill a book, but they haven't killed the Ed Klein book.
And Ed Klein can't get on television to talk about it.
They're canceling interviews.
Somebody's buying it, and I'll bet you they're reading it too.
Let's go to the uh let's go to the audio sound bites here.
Last night CNN Wolf blitzed reports.
The guest is Dick Durbin.
And uh Wolf said, uh Defense Secretary Rumsfeld said in reacting to your controversial remarks, some people always uh in their lives say something they wish they hadn't said.
Uh we just watched Jane Fonda run around trying to recover from the things that she didn't say of Vietnam.
And I just think that uh that's about all I have to say about Dick Durbin is that he said some things he's gonna have to live with them.
Others have made the point that your remarks are widely reported on Al Jazeera throughout the Middle East and the Arab world.
How do you feel about that, Senator Durbin?
I think there were a lot of my critics who tried to blow these remarks up as uh uh as much as they could and to run them in some aspects of our press over and over and over again.
I think they bear some responsibility too.
Uh that speech might never have been noticed, but for that activity on that side of the media.
But having said that, I apologize.
I stand by my apology.
Man, folks, I love this.
This is this is so good.
Why Al Jazeera may never have noticed what he said.
He's a United States senator, and he spoke from the floor of the United States Senate, and nobody would have heard it if it weren't for me.
If it weren't for that side of the media, repeating it over and over again.
Senator Durbin, what what centrifuge are you living in here?
How many times do you think you had to say it before Al Jazeera noticed it?
You didn't have to have it repeated by anybody for Al Jazeera to notice that.
Al Jazeera is watching all of U.S. Senators, and they're just itching for comments like yours to be made.
But this this line, that speech might never have been noticed, but for that activity on the side of the media.
Is that not incredible?
He speaks from the floor of the U.S. Senate, and he says, nobody might have noticed.
Hadn't been for the other side of the media, Rush Limbaugh and all those others, nobody would have noticed.
It's our fault.
It is our fault for spreading around what he said.
For letting people hear what he said.
He thinks that the floor of the U.S. Senate is a vacuum.
Let's go back to what he said on the Senate floor since he's blaming us for spreading around.
Let's spread it around some more.
If I read this to you and didn't tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have happened by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime, Paul Potter others that had no concern for human beings.
Sadly, that's not the case.
This was the action of Americans, you know, in treatment of our their own prisoners.
So we're facilitating the world understanding and hearing what Senator Durbin said since he's having such a tough time being heard, since speeches and remarks on the floor of the Senate occur in a vacuum.
So we'll do it again.
Now uh Kendrick Meek.
Uh he's uh he's is he member Congress?
Is he is is he a son of Carrie Meek?
Or is he related to Carrie Meek?
I'm not I'm I'm not sure, but he was on C SPAN today.
Uh Washington Journal Steve Scully was the uh Yeah, he's got because it's uh from Florida.
Representative Kendrick Meek from uh Florida, that's where Kerry Meek uh is from, and uh the listen to this little exchange.
Do you listen to Rush Limbaugh or other talk radio hosts?
I hear of them.
You don't listen to their programs, though because if you listen to them in the morning or in the afternoon, they they're very critical to the Democrats whether it comes to Guantanamo Bay or Iraq, in essence, painting the Democrats as a party weak on defense, weak on national security.
Do you think their arguments are sticking to the Democrats?
Oh no, I don't think so.
I think people understand the reality.
I'm one that's I've been to Guantanamo Bay.
I understand the information that we're getting there from Guantanamo Bay is good information.
We should allow UN inspectors to go in and see exactly what we're doing and what we're not doing there.
That was today.
That was today.
We just had Ellen Tosher, who was on hardball uh two nights ago, saying she just got back with uh Sheila Jackson Lee and said that they looked at the place and it's a perfectly fine prison with uh the the no found no problems whatsoever.
Tosher had to then say there are there's so few problems there, we think that they've moved the real bad prisoners and are committing the atrocities somewhere else.
So here's Kendrick Meek.
Yeah, I think it's so bad down there, we need uh UN team to go in and take a look at it.
UN inspectors.
Kendrick, if you don't think that this kind of garbage is sticking the American people, they don't want to turn the prosecution of uh wars uh involving U.S. national security over to the United Nations.
It is sticking to Democrats.
Have you looked at the election results lately, Kendrick?
Have you taken a look at a map of the country where it's uh coordinated with red and blue?
Have you seen Kendrick?
What have you seen your own state?
What's happening in your own state, Kendrick?
Uh I I I'd say it's I'd say it's uh sticking.
And I have to play you this.
This is during the round table uh on the Fox special report with Britt Hume, uh Fred Barnes talking about Gitmo.
These terrorists are the most hardened killers in the entire world.
These people have let go.
They'd kill your mother, your father, your kids, and you too.
Uh just because you're Americans and uh I wouldn't call it club gitmo, but uh it's pretty good treatment for those people, that's for sure.
Show prep for the rest of the media.
Uh Larry in Detroit, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hello, Rush, uh Megadiddles from Oregon Marine.
Uh glad.
Thank you.
Um just some comments on the uh President Bush's speech last night.
Uh was a strong speech.
Uh the no time table made a lot of sense uh for several reasons.
I think uh you don't telegraph your punches or your uh strategy to your enemy, and they'll know how to long to wait it out, and uh they'll also know how to conserve their resources after their departure.
After our departure, rather.
And uh a couple of other things, too.
The uh an increase in troops, uh, it might expedite uh our departure, perhaps, but I think the left would probably spin that around later on and probably say that uh the escalation represents uh support of the quagma that they've been talking about, so those are some points I thought made sense.
Uh, in short.
Uh, well, the problem they're gonna have with that is that you got Democrats out there calling for more troops.
Indeed.
They've been calling for more troops.
Wesley Clark was the first to call for more troops, or Shali Kashvili, and then John Kerry called for more troops, and Tom Friedman of the New York Times called for more troops a couple Sundays ago.
Now, if we get more troops out there, the Democrats then turn around and say, see, it's a quagmire.
Uh uh we don't you know, I'm I'm gonna I hope I'm gonna represent.
I'm pretty confident I do.
Uh the thinking of the majority of you people in this audience.
I don't think we need more troops.
We don't need more troops.
We need more bombs.
We need more bombers.
We need more B-52s, B1s and V2s, stealth F 17s.
That's what we need.
A man, a legend, a way of life.
Rush Limbaugh, play by playman of the news as America's anchor man with talent on loan from God.
The phone number is 800-282-2882.
Here's that economic news story I was looking for.
Consumer confidence index is at a three-year high.
U.S. consumer confidence rose to a three-year high in June, buoyed by a more optimistic view of the labor market, according to the conference board.
They said its gauge of sediment rose nearly three points to 105.8 from a revised 103.1 in May.
Analysts on average had expected a rise to 104.
Now this includes gasoline prices in there, too.
So I'm just I'm just saying this because we had uh Carvel and Greenberg with their little poll out saying that there's misery across the land, uh, but it's even worse for Democrats than it is uh Republicans.
I just don't believe I don't think there's misery across the land.
I just don't believe this supine vision of America.
These Democrats insist on uh on seeing.
And how about this?
This spite no announcement on Monday, it's still expected that the U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist will require retire soon, setting off a battle royal in Congress over choosing a successor.
A new Gallup poll released today finds that most Americans want President Bush to be ready and willing to compromise with the Democrats.
I just flat out don't believe this.
I just don't believe it.
There has to be something in the question that generates this answer.
Because I will guarantee you that the vast majority of the people this country couldn't name three Supreme Court justices as they had to.
The second thing I will guarantee you is that no number of Americans has as its big concern right now, whether the president will work with the Democrats on anything.
Much less the Supreme Court.
And this, did you know that the FDA, the FDA, no, the USDA.
The USDA actually did an investigation into why the tiger attacked Roy Horn of Siegfried and Roy.
You you won't believe what they investigated.
They thought maybe a woman with a beehive hairdo in the audience might have irritated the tiger.
They thought maybe a terrorist spread some kind of chemical in there that turned the t the tiger into a mean, vicious big cat.
They rejected the notion that the tiger was trying to protect Roy Horn from something.
They they closed the case last year with no official determination of what set off the animal.
They were unable to determine what caused the animal to deviate from the act.
A 233-page report said the tiger did indeed attack Horn.
Nowhere do they conclude that Tiger was trying to aid Horn after it knocked him down, despite the claims of Horn and others that the animal was only helping him out.
A veterinarian who examined the cat after the mauling said the animal appeared normal.
A USDA report said the animal had been fed on schedule.
Detectives with the Yellow uh Las Vegas Police Department's homeland security unit were assigned to the case because some of the scenarios that were suggested, among them that animal rights activists provoked the attack, or that it was an act of economic terrorism against Las Vegas, uh were all rejected.
Uh The casino was flooded with emails, the Mirage, uh, such as the one the USDA included in its report.
If there is audio and video of the tiger attack, it should be analyzed for Far UV or high ultrasonics, as well as other triggers that might be the work of a terrorist aiming at a high profile gay target.
Las Vegas, the meaning Roy Horn.
So they had an emailer suggesting that that a that somebody set the tiger off on Roy Horn because he was gay.
And so, ooh, yeah, we hadn't thought of that.
Better look into that.
Well, they rejected that.
And at the end of it all, they said, We don't know.
We don't know why the tiger attacked.
It hadn't done so in many years.
It was fed.
I I have the answer.
It's just it's so overwhelmingly simple that uh people will reject it.
A tiger is a tiger.
Uh Ron at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, you were there at the president's speech last night, correct?
That's correct, sir.
Megaditos, and thank you for uh doing what you did.
It was an honor to have been sitting there in the audience last night.
Can you answer a question for me right off the bat?
Are we right when we hear today that there's a protocol that uh people such as you in the audience last night do not applaud uh during a presidential address?
That is correct.
Uh it's it's just a courtesy, uh, he's our commander in chief, and there's certain respect there.
Uh, you know, there was uh a point later, I think it was about 20 minutes, 25 minutes into it when uh we felt definitely because he said something directly about us.
And then and of course at that point we did, and of course, gave him quite respect whenever he left.
All right, fine.
Well, I appreciate your uh answering the question.
What were your thoughts when you were there uh watching the speech?
Uh I thought it was uh very well prepared, and it was exactly what we uh in the country as well as in the military needed to hear.
Reiterating exactly what needs to be done.
I'm not sure where the media is getting, you know, we don't have a plan.
He doesn't know what he's doing, but it was very much there, and he stated that just as he had said before.
The steps that need to be done.
Well, that's I knew that's what was coming, and I knew the press was hoping he would admit mistakes or announce some kind of timetable or uh uh admit there were no weapons of mass destruction.
I know they were hoping for all these kinds of things.
I knew they were going to be livid when they didn't hear any of that, because the president has always been consistent about this.
From the first moment he's been speaking about Iraq, he's been consistent as he can be, and everything he said last night he has said before.
Well, he summarized it very well for us.
It was interesting afterwards, they asked uh some of us to speak with the local media, and uh I think you said on your show yesterday that they're gonna be looking for something, and that's exactly what they were doing.
The first question to me was, well, was there something he didn't say that you felt he should have said?
And I go, No, I think he clearly stated what needs to be done and how it needs to be done.
And how did they react to your answer?
They just kind of went on to another question.
Which I thought was interesting.
I mean, it's like, you know, we told them the truth, and and that was not really what they wanted to hear exactly.
No, I mean, they clearly had some things that they they wanted to hear.
Is in a situation like this, and I don't mean to put you on the spot.
Sometimes these questions can paralyze people, sometimes they do me, but okay, you watched the speech and you were asked to speak to the media.
Did you did you have such uh any kind of a reaction to it that was so strong that you hoped you were asked about that?
And if you were, what was it that you would hope to be asked about?
Well, that one's tough.
I know those are paralyzing questions.
Like name your favorite movies, uh, ten movies in the last fifty years, but can't be a good thing.
Well, I think I'll have to say the one thing that did surprise me when they started asking the questions afterwards to me, was it was like they hadn't listened.
They, you know, would they he clearly stated what needed to be done?
You know, it's interesting.
Ron, it's interesting you say that because the AP Actually filed a story on the speech an hour before it was given.
Uh and they referred to you at Fort Bragg as Marines.
And they had to reissue the story, but somebody told them the Marines are not at Fort Bragg.
Uh and they actually released because they got the transcript of the speech.
So they they they uh they wrote the story that somebody that and they all do it, they file advances, but I think it illustrates your point.
They um they they already had their their uh opinion of the speech made up before it was given, before it was delivered, and they had the template that they were going to use to cover it already made up before the speech was given.
And of course they assumed, I think that just as they are skeptical skeptical, so would you be.
I think uh many in the in the mainstream press, Ron, would actually hope and think that you and the military would be among the greatest enemies of the president, because in their way of thinking, you ought to hate this because this is a going nowhere war.
This is a war where you're standing around and just getting shot at, and some of you are getting killed, and some of you were getting wounded, the insurgents are winning, there's no exit strategy, we're not fighting the war on terror anymore, and they expect you to be even angrier than they are, and when you're not, I think that's what throws them for a loop.
Well, then they need to talk to us in the military because I tell you what, it's not the feeling of the military.
We saw last night a commander in chief being the commander in chief.
And one of the other questions I'll just throw this in too is they asked me afterwards, well, was you disappointed there wasn't some sort of a timeline or something.
And I just look right back at him.
I said, Did you not hear what the president said that if we was to do that, that would play into the terrorists' hands, into the enemy's hands.
They forget this is a war.
Well, no, they haven't forgotten that.
They look at it as the Vietnam War, Ron, and they forced the conclusion.
Their predecessors in the media forced the conclusion of the Vietnam War by ginning up anti-war support among the American people, and they did it with the same basis.
When are we getting out of there?
This is going nowhere.
We're accomplishing nothing.
And we gotta get out of there.
And so they're just trying to relive the glory days.
And so this whole notion, and every member of the press that was commenting on this said the same thing as you just said.
There was no mention of a timetable, there was no mention of this, there was no mention of that, as though what they want uh is what the president should say.
And that's not how President Bush acts.
He doesn't try to satisfy his critics.
And I just find it interesting, say it again, that after the speech is over, the press and the Democrats say what they say, and we're supposed to react to that, rather than they honestly reacting to what the president said, rather than make a big case over the things he didn't say.
Ron, uh God bless you and all of you uh uh in the armed forces, and I'm I'm uh I'm flattered that you have time to listen that you take time to call.
It's great to speak to you.
Well, thank you for listening, Rush, and I'll say that every military person would also tell you that it's our honor to preserve the rights of our American people, and for the NC even criticize us.
It's our honor to preserve those rights.
I understand.
I I was in Afghanistan in February, and I didn't talk to um well, I did hear one member of the armed forces I spoke to have any regrets or disagreements of why they were there, and they were free to speak.
It was just the opposite.
They all told me personally why they were there.
They were volunteers, folks.
There's they're all volunteers.
And they they told me personally why they signed up, why they wanted to go.
And the most common answer I got was a variation on the theme of this is what I think I can best do to protect my family and my country after what I saw at 9 11.
Now the people that forget what happened on 9 11 lose that context and perspective and eventually begin to think that this is a war taking place in a vacuum that has no purpose.
Ergo, their commentary is informed in that way, and you get the kind of incomprehensible analysis that we got last night.
Thanks again, Ron.
A quick time out, and we'll be right back.
Stay with us.
Another call from Fort Bragg, North Carolina.
This is Mike.
Hello, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Hey, how you doing?
Just fine, sir.
Thank you.
I was just calling in uh reference to all the comments that I heard about uh the other reporters And uh Democrats saying that they support us, but they don't support the president plan, and he doesn't have a plan, and he does.
And if all the military supports the president and they don't support him, how are they really supporting us?
I don't I don't understand it.
It's kind of contradicting themselves with what they're exactly right about that.
I I've I've found it just as you have, a little bit hard to follow.
They say they support the troops, but and of course they they say, of course we support the troops.
Well, wherever we are, of course we support the troops.
Well, we don't support the mission.
Well, what is it the troops do?
Uh how is Abu Grab, how is what Durbin said about Club Gitmo, how is all that supporting the troops?
It isn't supporting the troops.
How is undermining the president's policy supporting the troops when the troops are assigned to carry it out?
That's all they're doing is demoralizing the demoralizing the troops by by all the stuff they're saying.
They're they're not doing anything productive.
They have no plan as what they would do.
All they can offer is how bad something else is.
And they got nothing to offer, and everybody that I know supports the president.
And I I just I just don't get their line of thought.
I don't know if it's a good idea.
Well, uh uh I don't, as I say, uh nobody understands it because nobody accepts it.
They don't I don't think they're actually getting away with uh convincing anybody they support the troops.
I mean, they um they say they support the troops, but yet they oppose the president, commander-in-chief.
The troops are implementing the president commander-in-chief's policies.
They don't judge, they don't they don't go together.
I guess they might try to say they support you in principle, and they would support veterans' benefits, and they would support uh all of this.
But it when it comes to the mission, uh uh they're trying to undermine the mission.
They're trying to they're trying to make sure the president is not succeeding, uh, not only abroad, but at home, and it's you guys that implement his mission.
So if they're trying to undermine the emission, the mission they're trying to undermine you.
Uh, and they uh they won't obviously admit that.
They may not even recognize it.
Now let me ask you something.
Is it really telling the truth?
And I'm not challenging you, I just I just I want to hear this because I don't hear it very often.
Is it really demoralizing when you hear this constant uh criticism of the uh of the efforts that you're making?
Yes, it is.
I mean, because I mean we work hard, we put a lot into what we do, and we we all believe in what we're doing, and we s you know, we miss a lot of time away from home.
I got a family, and uh, you know, I like I would love to be here with them.
But I got I I got into this knowing full well what it entails, and um I I'm willing to make the sac sacrifice.
I I wish that they would all support us in it.
You know, it would be really nice.
Not not that every time you you watch a TV or listen to the radio, hear one of them saying something bad about what we're doing, how everything's going wrong, and not talking about all the good stuff that we do, because we do a lot of good things for for other people around the world.
It's just it's just frustrating.
Well, I I certainly understand that, and I've I um I'm I'm sorry to hear it.
Uh I think one thing I I should tell you uh is that while it it it I guess I understand how it demoralizes, there's no question that it could.
But believe me when I tell you, the vast majority of people in this country support what you're doing.
I told the troops this in in Afghanistan when I had a chance to visit them.
They not only they they support what you're doing, they love you.
They have they have awe and respect for what you're doing.
And if you get sent over and you come back, when you get off the airplane and walk to the airport, you're gonna get applause.
You're you the American people are gonna cheer you if you get off that airplane in a uniform.
Uh and these efforts to demoralize are sad.
Uh I I I did get questions like this when I was in Afghanistan.
Uh why why is the press uh you know so negative about what we're doing here?
In Afghanistan, it's why are they not even talking about what's going on here?
And I said, because there's nothing bad going on here.
You'll notice the minute the Taliban started launching these little skirmish attacks.
Boy, the coverage coming out of Afghanistan is ginned up, isn't it?
Another another copter shock now, another car bomb.
Why uh as far as the press is concerned, Afghanistan, it's erupted all over again.
But while good things are happening there, you never hear a word about it.
Mike, thanks for the call.
I have to run.
We'll take a break, be right back and continue in just a moment.
AP has just released a story saying that uh Tony Blair says the Downing Street memos paint a distorted picture and the Iraq war was not predetermined.
Tony Blair disavowing the Downing Street memos in an AP stories, and he's a lib.
So uh let's have John Kerry and Ted Kennedy move on.org and the rest of you zooks uh take out after one of your own.
▲
Export Selection