All Episodes
Previous Next
July 21, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:53
July 21, 2005, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
All right, we are jam-packed here today, folks, so you're going to have to listen fast because we got a lot to do, and this is the last day I'm going to be here until the 1st of August, because I am taking a vacation next week.
I got something special to tell you about that that's really cool, but we'll get to that in due course.
Greetings, welcome.
It is the award-winning Thrill Pact Ever Exciting, increasingly popular, growing by leaps and bounds, Rush Limbaugh program here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network of the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
We're going to make a couple of adjustments in our normal programming schedule today, folks.
Bernard Goldberg will be here at 1 o'clock to discuss his book, 100 People Who Are Screwing Up America.
Mr. Goldberg is being mistreated on some of these Namby Pamby irrelevant little cable shows.
And this offends me and bothers me.
And so we're going to have Mr. Goldberg on and give his book a fair treatment today.
Same thing's happening to Rick Santorum.
Everybody's ganging up on Rick Santorum, senator from Pennsylvania, over some comments that he has made about the Catholic Church abuse scandal being centered in Boston.
And they're all over him today, and they have been for a while.
I want to have him on it in 2 o'clock for a while just to talk a little bit about that.
So before we get into all of that and whatever else happens on the program today, we've got another terrorist scare in London.
Four detonators went off.
The bombs didn't go off.
Nearby residents being evacuated from one of the underground stations.
Tony Blair today had a joint press conference with the Australian Prime Minister John Howard.
John Howard, by the way, and we have this audio coming up.
Great, great, great comments he made to these absolute nerds in the media.
I mean, you've got a reporter asking Blair, are you responsible for terrorism?
And if I were Blair, I would have said, no, are you?
The way you're blaming all the wrong people for what's going on.
Anyway, here is a portion of Blair's remarks to get us started.
What these people are trying to do, I mean, whoever is responsible for this latest incident, and that is to intimidate people and to scare them, to frighten them, to stop them going about their normal business.
Now, obviously, people will be concerned and anxious.
Of course they will.
And that's why it's important we give as much information as we can.
But on the other hand, it's important also that we respond by keeping to our normal lives and doing what we want to do, because to do otherwise is in a sense to give them the very thing they're looking for.
Yeah, and here's this question from an unidentified female infobabe reporter Et.
Do you feel that in a sense your policies may have put people in this position?
Well, I think I've said to you before that I feel that people who are responsible for doing these things are the people who do them.
Yeah, I mean, that makes total sense to me, but it probably doesn't make sense that a bunch of people in the media.
This just amazes me.
You know, when I saw this today, I started fantasizing.
I would love to be the president of the United States for just one press conference.
I would love to be Tony Blair for just one press conference.
And I would love to answer these questions the way I would love to see them answered just one time.
I know these guys can't answer these questions this way because the press is supposed to be inquisitive.
Press is supposed to be this and that.
The other thing.
You basically get a question.
Are your policies responsible for this, Mr. Blair?
No, I'm not responsible.
How about you?
Are you responsible for this?
How about you and your colleagues in the media, the way you're treating all this and this?
Are you responsible for?
Well, I am the one asking the questions.
Yeah.
Well, you better start answering some too, and you better be thinking about the way you're doing your job because the people doing this are the people doing this.
And you might be encouraging these people with the way you're covering the story, madam reporter at infobabe.
You know, just say it's just like back during the 80s, remember when Reagan was being blamed for the spread of AIDS?
Reagan was being blamed for the spread of AIDS.
You may not remember this, Dawn.
You were pretty young.
And I kept saying to myself, how can this be?
Do they have pictures of Reagan over in Lafayette Park with a bunch of men after dark?
Is Reagan out there having unprotected gay sex?
How can this possibly be?
But you just can't, you know, you can't.
That's why I would never succeed in politics.
Listen to this, though.
This is John Howard.
He is the Australian Prime Minister.
And this is just fabulous.
This is going to make you shout from the rooftops.
On the issue of the policies of my government and indeed the policies of the British and American governments on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it's given the game away to use the vernacular.
And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats.
And no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.
Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq?
Can I remind you that the 11th of September occurred before the operation in Iraq?
Yes.
Can I also remind you that the very first occasion that bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor?
Are people by implication suggesting we shouldn't have done that?
When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on the 7th of July, they talked about British policy not just in Iraq but in Afghanistan.
Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?
When Sergio de Mello was murdered in Iraq, a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, a person immensely respected for his work in the United Nations, when Al-Qaeda gloated about that, they referred specifically to the role that DeMello had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations Administrator in East Timor.
Now, I don't know the mind of the terrorist.
By definition, you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber.
I can only look at objective facts.
And the objective facts are, as I've cited, the objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq.
And indeed, all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggest to me that this is about hatred of a way of life.
This is about the perverted use of the principles of the great world religion that at its root preaches peace and cooperation.
And I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.
That's Australian Prime Minister John Howard saying it as it is, telling it like it is.
We were attacked long before Iraq and Afghanistan, you saying we shouldn't be there.
Of course, the press probably nodding their head.
Yeah, we don't think we should be there.
We're scared here.
Think they're attacking, because we've gone all over the world and attacked them.
Uh, so you just, you know these, these are these.
These kind of guys are few and far between folks, they are rare, and it's uh, it's worth noting.
Uh, John Howard, one of our strongest and staunchest allies in the?
Uh in the war on terror, along with Tony Blair and the United Kingdom.
We'll wrap up this segment here with the CNN correspondent, Christiana Monpor.
This is some of her commentary today, uh, from London.
Listen to this.
This is almost identical to what happened two weeks ago and yet nowhere near serious.
And and the police are saying now, Ian Blair, that this was obviously an attempt at simultaneous explosions.
They went off pretty much simultaneously, but some of the devices didn't work properly.
How is it possible?
I mean, is it?
Do you think?
Um, is it the same kind of people?
Or, or what kind of people would?
Would not be able to get four devices to explode?
She's talking to another reporter there.
This is the the essence of CNN coverage, one reporter talking to another reporter saying, who these idiots?
How come they couldn't get these bombs to go off yet?
It was the similar, I mean it was.
What does she say was?
Uh uh, almost identical to what happened, except nowhere near as serious.
It's like saying, almost exactly the way it happened last week, only different.
What, what?
What kind of people uh, or what?
What kind of people would not be able to get four devices to explode.
So where's the hell's our story?
We want those bombs to go off.
We're sitting out here doing nothing, talking to each other.
All we got to do is a bunch of fizzling detonators out there.
Okay folks, why didn't the bombs go off?
Who are these people, I guess?
I guess Christian.
You've just learned out that the terrorists are fallible.
We'll be back after this.
Stay with us.
America's anchorman, America's truth detector, Rush Limbaugh, behind a golden EIB microphone.
We are Ditto camming the program today.
All of it at Www.rushlimbaugh.com.
Terror investigators hunting the London bombing mastermind are to question a suspected Al-Qaeda planner held in Pakistan.
British-born Harun Rashid Aswad was seized at a religious school with a suicide bomb, belt explosives and GPP British pounds $13,000 in cash.
Security sources in the Pakistani capital Islamabad, claim that he had up to 20 telephone conversations with the London bombers, Mohammed Sadiq Khan and Shahzad Tanwir, one of these believed to have been just hours before the blast.
Anyway, this guy had a meeting with Bin Laden.
Everybody's talking about how these things are because we're in Iraq has nothing to do with Iraq.
Australian Prime Minister, John Howard.
Right out of money I found a quote.
A friend of mine sent me a quote today from Robert E. Lee, and I want any of you who are in the mainstream media to listen to this, because this just shows you the more things change, the more they stay the same.
This is Robert E. Lee talking to a friend, admitting that the South had made a huge mistake from the beginning, why It appears that we appointed all of our worst generals to command the armies, and we appointed all of our best generals to edit the Newspapers.
I mean, I found by reading a newspaper that these editor generals saw all the defects plainly from the start, but they didn't tell me until it was too late.
I'm willing to yield my place to these best generals, and I'll do my best for the cause by editing a newspaper.
Basically, what he's saying is, is that, you know, it's amazing.
All these generals that write for the newspapers have no clue what they're doing.
They're always telling me what I'm doing wrong after the fact.
Why don't they tell me what I'm doing wrong before I get started?
In fact, let's trade places.
You know, you people in the media think you know what's best and how to run.
You go ahead and do it, and we'll take your jobs.
That's Robert E. Lee.
I have a piece I want to share with you here, ladies and gentlemen, from the Canada Free Press.
The Canada Free Press, this is going to take us back to last week in somewhat of a simmering, I don't know if it's a controversy or not, but it certainly is a lot of people with a lot of question marks out there.
The writer here is Klaus Rorich.
If you've ever doubted that the Democrats' luminaries are either A, loopy and or B, convinced that their constituents are total morons, then listening to George Soros' commercial dealing with the evils of Karl Rove will forever erase any doubts.
I first heard this commercial last week while driving through New York and listening to talk radio.
My first impression was that it was a clever and very funny spoof on the Democrats' feelings about Rove.
A very lugubrious voice starts by telling the audience that Karl Rove, like George Bush, is from Texas and therefore, like Bush, he's a liar.
In the background, a whispering second voice echoes what the first voice is saying.
He lies.
Then the voice goes on to say that Rove leaked the name of a secret CIA agent to the press, all the while accompanied by the whispering voice echoing, CIA agent to the press.
Finally, the voice says that Karl Rove's name starts with a letter K, just like the Klan.
And then to make sure that no one would think this was a clever spoof, a tag at the end of the commercial informs the listener that the infomercial was paid for by George Soros.
I still had difficulty believing the commercial wasn't a spoof, as a man as supposedly astute as Soros would appear to be more nuanced and sophisticated, unless, of course, he thought his audience was comprised of slavering idiots.
As a spoof, the piece was brilliant.
As a serious political commercial, it was probably the most lowbrow effort I've ever heard.
If Karl Rove were to reciprocate with his own commercial, it might go something like this.
George Soros is Hungarian, just like Janos Kadar, and therefore like Kadar, Soros is a communist, blah, Admittedly, my spoof of Soros commercial about Rove is every bit as tasteless, yet it contains about the same amount of truth.
Interesting thing is, if someone in the Republican Party ran my commercial on American radio, the outcry emanating from the so-called mainstream media would be deafening.
Yet so long as the character being assassinated is that of a Republican and one in the Bush camp, at that, the media will continue napping.
What the Democrats and their media lapdogs haven't glommed onto as yet is that the Australian public isn't nearly as stupid as they think, and they're no longer buying it.
That's one of the reasons why Americans have been deserting a Democratic Party in droves, leaving only the left-wing nutters to run the show.
The piece goes on, and the closing paragraph is, It's a comforting feeling knowing that there are people like George Soros who are spending their own money in an effort to vilify the Republicans.
Their negativity has a much more positive effect on Republicans than anything the GOP could do on its own.
As evidence of this PR disaster begins to mount, Soros and the Democrats will probably claim that the devious Karl Rove cleverly and nefariously maneuvered the hapless Soros into paying for his commercial.
All right, now I have to ask a question.
I asked Mr. Mr. Sterdley read this.
Is it your impression that this man thinks the thing is real or is a spoof?
He thinks it's real.
You think he thinks this is he knows it's real as a spoof.
The piece was brilliant as a serious political commercial, probably the most lowbrow effort I've ever heard.
Last week, I have felt terrible about this ever since it happened.
Last week, a woman called claiming she had heard this on our affiliate in Oklahoma City, KTOK.
She was in Norman, Oklahoma.
And she was outraged by it.
And she also told me that she'd had some pain in her family recent death.
And I just didn't have the I just judged it that wasn't time to tell her that it was a spoof and that it was ours.
And then I continually amazed.
I think these spoofs are so obviously spoofs that you'll all understand it.
But you should have seen the email last week after that call.
I thought it was a spoof too, Rush, but no, I guess it's real.
And then I had people from every state in this country reporting what stations were airing this in my show so that I would know.
And it just led me back to what something I learned long ago and have failed to, in this case, cement.
And that is that good parody, good satire, good comedy has to have an element of truth in it or it's not good.
If it doesn't have an element of truth and believability, then it's not going to be brought off.
Well, apparently, this Rove spot of ours, this George Soros Rove spot, is one of the best because there are people who think it's real.
And they think it's real because it's totally believable.
And the fact that people think it's real, I think, is a fabulous sign.
It's a fabulous sign that they are aware of the kind of garbage being run by Soros and moveon.org and Americans coming together.
Here is the spot.
And let me now admit for the first time in broadcast history that this spoof is ours.
We created this spoof.
We wrote it.
We produced it.
If you hear it running on your affiliate station, it's because we are running it.
We have the only golden master copy.
Anybody else has one, has a dub?
My friends, as you listen to this program, never forget one of the things that we are most known for here is illustrating absurdity by being absurd.
Irreverent humor combined with serious discussion of the issues, credibility on both sides.
In fact, we have a new little tune we want to play for you about John Roberts and the Senate Democrats' upcoming hearings, Supreme Court and all that right after this break.
Sit tight.
We'll be back right after this.
And we are here, the Excellence at Broadcasting Network, Rush Limbaugh.
Great to have you with us.
The telephone number, if you'd like to join us today, is 800-282-2882.
Email address, rush at EIBnet.com.
All right, John Roberts, Judge Roberts, I want to tell you there are two things at work here.
One of them, both of them, actually I mentioned yesterday, the Democrats are having a tough time, and they're going to have an impossible time to oppose the man on anything to do with any kind of substance.
So I want to make a prediction.
Well, in fact, I made the prediction to people last night, and it's already come true, so you may have heard about it before I made the prediction.
But I think what they're going to do, I said last night, what they're going to do is try to derail the guy at the hearings on the basis of he won't answer our questions.
And they're going to ask for documents when he was at the Solicitor General's office, and they're going to ask for documents that they're not entitled to have on the basis of separation of powers, and the SG's office is not going to turn them over, and we're going to be stuck right where we were with Miguel Estrada and John Bolton.
And the Democrats will say, well, we can't go forward with this.
Why they haven't turned over all the documents?
What are they hiding?
All we want to do is see what he thought during these pieces.
We don't have much of a record on Judge Roberts.
This will give us an idea of his thinking.
And the White House is refusing to turn this over.
Why?
What are they trying to hide?
Blah, Keep a sharp eye out for that.
There's another thing.
Linda Greenhouse, I told you yesterday, she's the Supreme Court, Supreme Writer at the Pinch Times, the New York Times.
And lo and behold, I told you yesterday, I told you yesterday that one of the problems the libs are going to have with this guy is that he's big in the DC social circuit.
He's given his cell phone number to journalists.
They can reach him.
He doesn't hide.
You know, he doesn't hibernate.
He runs around.
He's not a social butterfly.
Don't misunderstand.
But, you know, he's not a hermit.
And he doesn't avoid these people like Clarence Thomas or Nino, as he's now popularly called by his friends, Scalia.
And lo and behold, here comes Linda Greenhouse, a piece of the New York Times, talking about how, well, this Roberts guy gets out, and there's going to be a chance to influence him and have him grow.
She doesn't say it this way.
You've got to know New York Times code to translate this from her story.
But there are many people who think that's what happened to Anthony Kennedy, that he grew, that he became friends with the D.C. culture, became concerned about what they write about him, and says his conservative view is somewhat moderated.
His liberal views grew.
And the New York Times is throwing the first little temptation, if you will, to Judge Roberts with the Linda Greenhouse piece.
In the meantime, less than 15 hours after President Bush announced that John Roberts would be his nominee, leading Democrats stood before a bank of TV cameras and criticized the president.
Their ire had nothing to do with Roberts.
Senator Barbara Boxer and Representative Jane Harmon assailed Bush for failing to punish Carl Rove for his alleged involvement in disclosing the name of a CIA operative.
Roll Call says in a set of talking points issued Wednesday morning, the Senate Democratic leadership urged rank and file senators to continue spotlighting Rove's involvement in the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Playham's identity.
Supreme Court nominee will not distract the country from the growing credibility problems of the White House, Democrats were told to say.
And echo.
And you've heard the talking points.
They're all out there saying that Dingy Harry, Dingy Harry yesterday complaining about the fact that he was wagging his finger at reporters, said, you're going to put Rove back on the front page.
You can't just let Rove off this easy.
Blah, blah, blah.
This is so pathetic.
They're just so pathetic.
I just saw something.
Where is it?
Where is it?
I'll have to find it.
Battered left syndrome.
Somebody just sent me a note.
There's a new syndrome out there, battered left syndrome.
It's sort of like battered wife syndrome.
They keep getting beat up and they still hang around the people that beat them up.
And nobody can figure out why they don't just leave and change.
And they've got battered left syndrome out there.
And folks, I think I'm one of the batterers.
And that's why I feel honored to have this new syndrome named out there.
I'll have to get the name of the guy who did it.
Battered left syndrome.
They just keep punishing themselves.
They come back and they encourage more punishment or incur more punishment.
And they keep doing it in the same way.
They're not surprising anybody anymore.
If you want to give them a football team analogy, and by the way, speaking of football, I'm going to miss Teddy Bruski not playing this year.
Teddy Bruski of New England Patriots had a mild stroke in January, not long after the Pro Bowl.
And all the news accounts call Teddy Bruski the heart and soul of Patriots defense.
And he's that, but he's more as well.
If you can be more than the heart and soul, he is.
He's a great player.
It doesn't just provide inspiration.
He's a great player, makes great plays in big games.
And they're going to miss Teddy Bruski.
If you can understand it, mild stroke sitting out a year, he's still going to be with the team and offering encouragement and practice and acting as a coach primarily.
But it's too bad, scary.
These are people in the prime of physical condition in their 30s and have a mild stroke like that.
But the football analogy would be these guys do not have the forward pass.
All they've got is the off-tackle play, and they run it every play.
Everybody knows what's coming.
They know where to stack the hole.
You know, push them back, push them back, fart them back.
They're about ready to be pushed back into their fourth or fifth safety here.
They just keep coming at us the same way, and they're getting beat up, and it's battered left syndrome.
Let me give you examples.
Let's go to the audio tape.
Last night, PMS NBC hardballed David Gregory, really in a foul humor lately because Bush is out foxing him and everybody else in the media, talking to Katrina Vandenhoe.
Katrina Vandenhoevel, the editor of the left-wing underground rag called The Nation.
And also Terry Jeffrey of Human Events is on there.
And David Gregory says to Katrina Vandenhoe, where is Roberts vulnerable to the opposition?
I want to take it outside of the left-right context for a moment, if I might, because I think what's going to happen with the court is not so much moving right.
I think it's moving backwards.
I think that is the frame so many Americans may not articulate, but feel because the civilizing decisions of the last 70 years, whether in equal rights, in environmental rights, reproductive rights, workers' rights, may well be rolled back.
And I think certainly on Roe v. Wade, he's going to be questioned in very tough ways.
And in the excessive deference to executive power, at a time when I believe many Americans are worried about checks and balances and overweening power in an extraordinarily dominating GOP party.
Could there be a more out-of-touch person that they could go get to have on TV to represent the left?
See, I've never heard somebody so out of touch with reality.
Court moving backwards?
Court moving backwards?
I guess it depends on your perspective, but what in the world does a liberal have to complain about with the Supreme Court?
Katrina, if it weren't for the court, you wouldn't have half the things you think are important in this country.
People wouldn't vote for them if they had a chance.
The court's the only way you've gotten half of the stuff that's perverted this society.
To sit there and think the frame that so many Americans may articulate, the court's moving backwards, the American people, as expressed in polls, are worried about the judicial branch's overreaching power.
There is no separation of power between the executive branch and the judicial and congressional.
It's all assumed, legislative.
It's all assumed by you and the left that the Supreme Court is the final authority anywhere.
And you guys are going to make up your minds about judicial review.
You either like it or you don't.
Here, once again, she's worried about whether or not the new court with this new horrible man, Judge Roberts, probably personally selected by Karl Rove, is going to roll back environmental rights, equal rights, reproductive rights, workers' rights, every right, blah, left rights, all this sort of stuff.
Well, now wait a minute.
You guys keep saying that you want judicial review.
You want the court to be able to determine what's constitutional and what isn't, except when you don't control it.
You don't want that.
Like if you were consistent with this, if you're really worried about judicial review, then you got to go back and bring back Dred Scott to life.
If the court can't overturn itself, if the court can't say that something's unconstitutional or reverse the law of Congress, I guess it only can do those things when the left has a court in its control.
But this is, folks, this is hieroglyphics.
This is verbal hieroglyphics trying to translate this.
This is the best I can do.
I mean, even if you look at the pre-vacancy polls before O'Connor retired, the vast majority of the American people want somebody like John Roberts on the court.
And Ms. Vandenhoevel, as a typical liberal elitist, says the American people don't know what they want because they're too stupid to know what they want.
That's why we at the nation are trying to tell them every day.
But how many people subscribe and read that?
If it weren't for Yahoo putting it around in their RSS, 90% of the people who see the nation wouldn't see it.
And I'm not sure how many people see it then.
Here's more kook stuff, by the way.
One more bite from Madam Vandenhoeff.
The question here from David Gregory, what this election tells us about George W. Bush, the president, even the man.
Seems to me, Katrina, the president had this all set up in the very beginning, which is they sort of put out there that they want to make this about qualifications.
They're daring the other side to challenge an ideology using the Ginsburg model to say, look, she was a liberal, but she qualified.
She sailed through the confirmation process.
What are your thoughts on this?
My first thought would be, what's the question, Gregory?
But Katrina doesn't care what the question is.
Here's her answer.
I see something different.
I see a man in Bush who is not.
He's a divider.
But I also see someone who, again, wants to accrue as much power in the executive branch as he possibly can.
I refer back to this decision in the D.C. Circuit Court last week where Judge Roberts basically violating Senator Day O'Connor's view that war is not a blank slate.
The tape.
I told you that's the next thing they're going to go.
I told you this yesterday.
They're going to go after him on this decision that overruled a Clinton judge who had said that these military tribunals were unconstitutional, basically usurping the power of the Constitution granted to the commander-in-chief.
So they're going to go after this guy for participating in that unanimous decision, by the way.
Here's the rest of the bite.
But I'm going to answer Gregory's question here after Katrina muddles her way through the rest of her answer.
He wants someone who's going to defer to him, just as he wants a media who will defer to him.
And I would not, I would ask people to remember that Judge Roberts privately advised Governor Jeb Bush in 2000 in the recount about ways to overturn the, to overturn the courts, taking it to the Florida legislature.
The tape!
This is about to drive me nuts.
The courts in Florida were rewriting election law, Katrina, without the legislature having been involved.
If you look at the Constitution, the Florida Supreme Court nor any other state Supreme Court determines the electors from a state.
The legislature, the state legislature does this.
If Roberts was advising anybody here, Jeb Bush, it was how to get around a rogue out-of-control Florida Supreme Court, which was rewriting what's a Chad, what's not a Chad, what's a hanging Chad, what's a leaning Chad.
This is, it's amazing.
The answer to the question is, here's the question.
What this selection tells us about George W. Bush, the president, even the man.
Seems to me the president had this all set up at the very beginning, which is they sort of put out there that they want to make this about qualification.
Mr. Gregory, go check with your buddy Howard Feynman.
Howard Feynman swerves into the truth yet again in a piece at MSNBC Today.
You know why Bush keeps confounding you, Mr. Gregory, and all the rest of you in the media?
Because he's honest.
All he's doing is what he said he was going to do.
You keep looking for deceit because that's who you're used to covering, politicians who deceive you.
And in some cases, you marvel at how able they are to do it, such as Bill Clinton.
You never thought Clinton was telling the truth when he said anything.
So consequently, you don't think any politician that's good tells the truth.
Well, Bush, I'm going to pick this kind of person.
I'm going to pick this kind of guy.
I'm going to pick this kind of woman.
He did.
And they're wondering what the trick is.
How did Bush sandbag them?
Tell you what, folks, it's a pretty sorry situation in the media when you can trick them by telling them the truth back after this.
I listened to Katrina Vandenhoe or any of the other liberals, and I just have this question.
Why do they lie about what they really believe?
Why do they pretend to care about individual rights?
All this workers' rights, this rights, that's why they care about government.
They support government by judiciary, folks.
They're not worried about workers' rights, civil rights, this, right?
They're worried about abortion rights, but that's about it.
All this other stuff is just camouflage.
They believe in government by judiciary.
In essence, they support government by five or six unelected lawyers as long as they're activist liberals.
Now, she won't say that, but that's what she supports, and that's what she's afraid of losing as Bush nominates Roberts and others to the court.
You know, and their new hero, by the way, Sandra Day O'Connor.
Sandra Day O'Connor agrees with Roberts on his decisions in many, many cases.
I mean, I think these people are so inconsistent that they're, well, it's like battered Lib syndrome, battered left syndrome.
They just, you know, it's like, here, I've got this baseball bet.
Oh, good.
I want you to hit me again.
Here I come.
Whack.
I know it sounds violent, folks, and I don't mean it in a literal sense, but they're being battered around here, and they don't know it, and they keep coming back for more.
Andrew in Oklahoma City, I'm glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Hey, Rush, giga military bampow dittos from Oklahoma.
You know, when I heard that little spoof you did last week, I was driving to lunch on I-40 and damn near ran off the road.
That was just fantastic radio.
When you think about this, it reminded me of Orson Welles and War of the Worlds.
You've got people emailing you, telling you that they heard it too.
I mean, you didn't have people shooting guns at water towers like they did in Maryland, but it was awesome.
And the other point I had was the media, I don't know this gentleman, but to me, for him to write an article and not really say that, hey, this was a spoof and that he was just listening to talk radio makes me kind of wonder if he really knew.
And that's what makes this show awesome while I listen to it.
No, you can't.
It's great radio.
I thank you, and I really appreciate that.
But I wouldn't be put off by the Canadian reporter talking about or saying he listens to talk radio, but he knows that talk radio is me.
Synonymous.
Same thing.
That stuff doesn't bother me.
I still don't know.
As I've read the piece, I think he thinks it's real.
Or I think he thought that it was a real piece.
I think he did.
And that's where we hit pay dirt because it's so close to what a Searle said.
It's so believable.
I've listened to you for a long time, Rush.
You know, when I'm home and everything, and I knew right away it was a spoof.
And I'm pretty sure your normal listener would realize that.
So to me, when I heard that, that just put it over the top.
And I just really appreciate everything that you've done so far.
Military and Gitmo gear.
And I just appreciate it.
And oh, speaking of Gitmo gear, apparently we have got some fabulous new pictures in the Club Gitmo Photo Gallery.
Yeah, Coco sent me, you know, you got to come.
We added some since last night, some great pictures in the Club Getmo Photo Gallery at rushlimbaugh.com, people wearing their Club Gitmo gear.
One correction, Andrew, and don't take this personally.
There are no ordinary Limbaugh listeners.
Limbaugh listeners are extraordinary.
They're not ordinary.
The thing that I always count on that people are going to get it as a spoof is the voice we use of Johnny Donovan.
We've been using Johnny for 18, 17 years here.
He is the lugubrious voice that apparently fooled our friend in Canada, who's a nice guy.
His piece was not.
Don't misunderstand it.
He just, he's a Canadian, was driving around in New York for a while.
Bernard Goldberg will be up at the top of the hour a little bit after that to discuss his new book, The Hundred People Ruining the Country or whatever.
Back after this, stay with us.
The Club Guidmo pictures at the Club Getmo Photo Gallery.
There's one of them, some guy in front of an Apple store.
But there's a great one.
Some guy shows up in an anti-war rally and stands in front of some Looney Toon Kook Lib carrying some anti-war sign, wearing a Club Getmo t-shirt.
Bernard Goldberg is next.
▲
Export Selection