Rush Limbaugh Program - July 21, 2005, Thursday, Hour #3

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 21, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program

35:41

July 21, 2005, Thursday, Hour #3

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	The views expressed by the host on this program, documented to be, according to the latest opinion audit from the Sullivan Group in Sacramento, California, almost always right 98.5% of the time.
	And this is done, by the way, with half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair.
	Greetings, my friends.
	It's great to be back with you.
	The Rush Limbaugh program rolls on.
	We will be getting to your phone calls in a few minutes.
	The telephone number is 800-282-2882.
	But as promised, and I'm really excited to have him with us, Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania is here.
	Senator, welcome.
	Well, Rush, thank you for having me on.
	It's an honor to be with you.
	Well, I tell you, it's the same thing with Bernie Goldberg that we had on an hour ago.
	You're being sandbagged and you're being ganged up on not only by your colleagues in the Senate, a couple of them, but by members of the media as well.
	I watched, I've seen you on television, and hosts who are afraid that they might be called conservatives are withholding judgment on you, claiming you've stepped over the line or something.
	And it offends me.
	I know you personally, and I know you're nothing but a decent man who's being honest about what's in your heart.
	Now, the two things I gather, one is your book, It Takes a Family, Conservatism and the Common Good, which apparently has upset Ms. Rodham.
	And the other thing is you've said something that upset Senator Kennedy about Boston.
	And you haven't backed off on either of these, and that's to your credit.
	But I wanted to personally find out from you, what is all this about, and what do you think the genesis of all of this attention you're getting now is all about?
	Well, I mean, I'm in a tough race in 2006, and your good friend Chuck Schumer has said that your good friend has said that this race is the most important race in the country, and that their success will be measured as to whether they defeat Rick Santorum.
	And so they've got every gun trained at us, and everything I've said or done is fair game.
	And this one thing that Kennedy came after me on was something that I wrote three years ago.
	And the Democratic Senatorial Committee got it up.
	They gave the quote to Kennedy.
	They announced to all the press that Kennedy was going to the floor.
	And then after he went to the floor and said what he said, they had his comments immediately available, oddly enough, to send around to all the media, and they've been hyping it ever since.
	And it's not a surprise to me.
	They've been coming after us pretty hard.
	Do they quote you accurately or take it out of context?
	Well, they take it out of context.
	I mean, I spent the first half of the article talking about how outraged I am at the abuse and how this is an opportunity for us to clean the church up, that there were a lot of things, a lot of systematic problems within the church that we need to do.
	And let's take advantage of this opportunity.
	And look, I was very much out front on this.
	I went all around the country, met with bishops and cardinals and others, trying to get the message across, including folks in the Vatican, that this is something we should not trifle with.
	This is something that needed a strong statement and strong policy and new policies, and worked with the Keating Commission, which was put together by the Catholic bishops to try to deal with this problem.
	So, look, this was something I was very, very concerned about, and they took this out of context.
	And, you know, what I did was frankly nothing different than what Bob Bennett said, who wrote the Bennett report for the business conference.
	He basically said almost exactly what I said, which is the culture affects people's behavior.
	Is that Uncle Bob Bill Bennett's brother?
	That's exactly right.
	Uncle Bob, so you agree with Uncle Bob on this.
	But what exactly is the quote that Ted Kennedy used?
	I can paraphrase it for you, and this will just show you the power of the media.
	This is I've only heard about this from the media, and I gather the essence of what you said is that it's no surprise that the center of the Catholic Church abuse took place in a very liberal or perhaps the nation's most liberal area, Boston.
	Is that close to what you said?
	That's pretty much what I said.
	I said it's no excuse, but I said it's no surprise that the culture affects people's behavior.
	That's what I was saying.
	And this was, candidly, a culture that the liberal culture, the idea that sexual inhibitions should be put aside and people should be able to do whatever they want to do has an impact on people and how they behave.
	Senator, you've encountered something that I'm sure you encounter all the time.
	The worst thing you can do, well, not the worst, the most dangerous thing you can do is tell the truth about these people.
	Well, they don't like to be challenged.
	Let's just be very honest about that.
	And when they are challenged and you actually look at the consequences of their ideology and you see how it impacts people's lives and how it impacts families, you get people very upset.
	That's why when I wrote this book, It Takes a Family.
	I mean, that's what I do.
	I lay it out in very, very clear terms about what liberal ideology has done to destroy the American family and how we have to have a concerted effort in this country to try to help rebuild the traditional family because that's the ideal we should all strive for.
	Now, a question.
	In the article about the Catholic Church, you could have stopped after you said a community will be reflected by its culture.
	You could have not mentioned Boston.
	You could have not mentioned the Catholic Church location or Cardinal Law's problems.
	You did.
	Now, were you challenging them?
	Did you want to get noticed, or were you just completing an honest thought in this process?
	You know, I wish I could recall back three years ago when I wrote it, exactly what I was thinking at the time.
	I think I was expressing probably what a lot of Catholics were feeling at the time, outrage at the diocese and outrage at what had gone on up there for so long, both at the top and candidly, not just at the top, not just at the level of the cardinal there, but also at the seminaries, also at the church level, where we just simply did not do a good job.
	They did not do a good job in screening people.
	They did not do a good job in forming priests or forming, period, the Catholics in that area.
	And that was a great frustration because I felt betrayed as a Catholic.
	I felt hurt.
	I felt that, you know, this is my faith, which I strongly believe in.
	And it was being dragged through the mud, as you know, at that time, just every single day.
	It was powerful.
	Oh, it still is.
	Well, it still is.
	But at that time, I mean, it was headline news every day, you know, how awful the Catholic Church was.
	And I just felt very angry at people who had allowed that to happen to a faith that I fully embrace.
	Senator, I mean, I must be honest with you.
	I think it's just as vicious.
	It's just it's changed its direction from the abuse aspect.
	I mean, you look at every potential Supreme Court nominee or appellate court nominee who may be Catholic or is Catholic.
	There is a subtle, you know, my friend Chuck Schumer, as you say, or others will come out and question the personal, deeply held personal beliefs that you know that that's a reference to religion.
	And when you call them on it, they have the same conniption that Senator Kennedy had with your article.
	And it's all about abortion, and it's all about the Catholic Church lack of rigidity and accommodating what liberals want it to be.
	So I think it's still the only religion today that, you know, Christianity in general, that you can make fun of with impunity.
	Well, they certainly do.
	But it'd be interesting.
	As you know, Judge Roberts is a Catholic.
	And we'll find out whether the deep religious beliefs issue will be coming up at these hearings.
	L.A. Times already has a profile on his wife.
	Wife of nominee holds strong anti-abortion views.
	Yes, the red flags going up.
	Wasn't the L.A. diocese, Cardinal Mahoney, wasn't that in nearly as bad a shape as a leader?
	Yeah, we don't know the full extent yet of Los Angeles, but what we're hearing is that it may be a lot of people.
	Well, you have another liberal community there, is my point.
	What's that?
	You got another liberal community there.
	Oh, not just that, but you also have, candidly, I mean, the leadership there has not been good.
	And, you know, it's been the kind of, in my opinion, the kind of weak leadership that we've seen in some of the other dioceses that we've had problems.
	So it's both.
	One of the things I think I make clear in the article, the excerpts don't make clear, which is it's not one thing.
	I'm not saying that that is the reason.
	I went through a whole variety of different things that caused this problem, and a big part of it is the lack of leadership in the church and a refusal to address these issues at the seminaries and other levels.
	You have five more minutes.
	I just want to.
	I sure do.
	Let me ask you for you.
	You got it.
	I want to ask you about the Hillary Contra attempts.
	I think I'm going to like this too.
	We'll be back in just a second.
	This is Senator Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania with us.
	And don't go away, folks.
	Be right back.
	And we're back, and we happily rejoin Senator Rick Santorum from Pennsylvania.
	Senator, I just found a story here, and I actually saw this last night, and I printed it out, and I forgot to bring it in today, but I just found it again.
	And it's going to just want to share with you the headline because it's funny.
	It's from Berkeley, it's San Francisco Chronicle.
	Activists start working on liberal spirituality.
	It's about time.
	And we will have details of this when we finish the interview with Senator Santorum.
	Now, the story in Newsmax says that Hillary Clinton was seething over your, well, the New York Post says it was a frosty encounter with you.
	She paused during a Capitol Hill interview with a post reporter to let out a week's worth of pent-up frustration about your new book, It Takes a Family, Conservatism and the Common Good.
	Did this happen?
	And if so, what happened?
	Well, I was walking in the basement of the Capitol building, and Mrs. Clinton was coming toward me and had a whole bunch of reporters, sort of a gaggle of folks around her.
	And I was walking by myself, and she saw me from maybe 15 paces apart.
	And she said, Now, remember, Rick, it takes a village, which sort of surprised me that you would engage on that topic.
	And I said, no, Hillary, it takes a family.
	And at that point, we had just passed each other.
	So I thought, you know, retort, if you will, and that was it.
	And then the next thing I know, I hear sort of coming over my shoulder, no, the family is part of the village, which I decided at that point to sort of break off negotiations and move on.
	Again, you must have really hit the nail on it.
	I was surprised that it evoked the, I mean, she obviously knew that this was a public comment because she was in the middle of an interview, obviously, and had a lot of reporters around her.
	So I assume, as you have said very often, that those folks don't do anything by mistake.
	It's all by design.
	Yeah, nothing is by accident.
	Nothing is by accident.
	It's strategy.
	I mean, they even have meetings to find out what they believe, Senator.
	You know, they'll have three-hour meetings to find out what they believe, and they'll come out empty-handed.
	They'll say they made some headway, but they're not yet ready to announce anything.
	And it all depends on what their focus groups tell them they should believe or something else.
	Yeah, the New York Times magazine was pretty clear on that, the story over the weekend, where this is all about framing the message to try to destroy the Republicans on abusing power and providing absolutely no ideas, absolutely no solutions, absolutely no alternatives.
	It's just simply search and destroy.
	Well, let me ask you, your book is 449 pages in homeschooling, welfare reform, and you really emphasize the promotion of family over big government.
	And I assume that's what Mrs. Clinton means by village, right?
	That was my interpretation, having seen her voting record and skimmed her book.
	So 449 pages, where do you find time to write a book like this with everything else that you're doing?
	Well, I spent about a year and a half on the book, to be honest with you.
	And the last, I guess from November, end of November through April, I spent a lot of time.
	I thank my wife and my children for their tolerance.
	But I did a lot of it, frankly, when they were sleeping late at night.
	I just stayed up and hammered away at it.
	I had a lot of folks, as you read the preference, I had a lot of folks who helped me who contributed ideas and thoughts and outlines and stuff.
	So it was a collaborative effort.
	I can't take responsibility for every word there, but I work very hard on it.
	And I think people who have read it so far, who know me, say they hear my voice in it.
	So that's a good thing.
	Well, what do you make of the cozying up to Mrs. Clinton that some Republican senators have done?
	Or maybe it's another way, is she cozying up to them or is it mutual?
	I think that what's happening is an attempt to find this centrist ground that her husband found when he was running for office and try to portray a sense of being in touch with all the values that people are concerned about.
	I think from the 2004 election, they've learned a lesson that you can't run a values-free campaign and win in America.
	And it doesn't necessarily mean a constitutional amendment for affirming marriage.
	I mean, it's values like not knowing that your children are growing up in a society that's hostile to them, that parents aren't safe to let their kids turn on a television anymore.
	It's this uneasiness that the culture isn't there or the government isn't there or no one.
	The popular culture, the media, academia, no one's there to help them raise their children.
	They're all out there trying to send messages that these parents don't want to send to their kids.
	And it's that kind of values that I think most people are talking about.
	And the Democrats have been ignorant of it, and they're trying to tap into it without really doing anything about it.
	They're just going to talk about it, sort of school uniforms, if you will.
	Well, maybe I may be going overboard here in what you as a member of that body can answer because it might be construed as commenting on another senator.
	And I know you have rules about that.
	But is it your impression as an observer that Mrs. Clinton is succeeding in this effort to look more quote-unquote centrist on values?
	Well, all I would suggest is that if you're trying to move and reposition yourself, having everybody talk about you doing it is probably not the best thing to do.
	You sort of lose the effect of trying to appear sincere if everybody is talking about how you're planning on doing this.
	So I'll leave it to the public as to whether they buy it.
	But I think the fact that it seems like such a deliberate attempt might rob the, it might sort of lessen the sincerity factor.
	Senator, one more thing before I let you go.
	Unrelated, we're looking now at the Supreme Court fight that's coming up on Judge Roberts.
	This takes me back to the campaign that Senator Specter waged.
	A lot of people don't understand why the president of the United States supported Senator Specter as an incumbent.
	They don't understand, I think, the traditions.
	And likewise, they don't understand the president campaigning for Link Chaffee and helping him raise money when Link Chaffee didn't even support him for president.
	Could you help people listening to this program understand how that works?
	I mean, we're talking about Pat Toomey.
	Right.
	A lot of people think issues come first and what's in your heart ideologically should determine it.
	But what are the traditions that govern a president in this kind of quagmire?
	Yeah, I think what the president sees is he's the leader of a team, and the team has a lot of different members on it, and all of which contribute to the team and all of which are important to the team.
	And what I think the president is trying to say is that if he's going to go as he does, as I do as a member of the leadership, to members of the team and ask for their vote for the team sometimes against their interest.
	In a sense, when I say against their interest, they may not ideologically agree with this.
	I can tell you there are many, many votes where folks who don't necessarily agree with us on things realize that for the president's agenda, for being a governing majority, sometimes you've got to suck it up and give one for the team.
	That happens with regularity on the floor of the United States Senate.
	I think the president recognizes that.
	I recognize that.
	And if you're going to ask folks to be part of the team, then when it's their time to stand up and fight for their political survival, you can't say, well, I needed you then, but you're on your own now.
	I don't think the president would have a very easy time convincing other members who may not agree with him all the time to support him ever.
	If it looks like that the president, when he has the opportunity, will cut them loose and not be a good loyal team member in their own election.
	So what is incumbency trumps in circumstances like this simply because that means there's an existing relationship?
	Well, it's not just relationship, but it's the ability to be able to get folks to help when maybe they don't want to help.
	And they do that because they realize that they're part of something bigger than themselves.
	Now, that to me is important to be able to have that kind of relationships.
	It is relationships, but it's also getting things done.
	And it's getting things done that are conservative.
	It's getting things done that move America in the right direction that Arlen Specter or Olympia Snow or Susan Collins may not agree with, but they'll help us on procedural votes.
	They'll help us on other votes where maybe three will vote against, but the one or two that we need will vote for us so we can get it done.
	Senator, I have to have to do that.
	I have to stop you.
	I lost control of the clock.
	I've got 10 seconds.
	I want to thank you properly for joining us.
	I appreciate your making the time.
	We admire you here.
	Many people in this audience do, and we wish you the continued best.
	Thank you.
	You bet.
	We'll be back in just a second, folks.
	Stay with us.
	Yes, my friends, we are back.
	Happy to have you with us here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
	All right.
	Before we get back to your phone calls, I've got a couple things here in the stack I want to get to before we finish today.
	I, of course, am departing, actually, before tomorrow, sometime tonight.
	Can't be specific about this security, you know.
	But I'm departing for a brief time off.
	I'll be off tomorrow through all of next week.
	And a portion of the trip, I'm going to a part of France I've never been.
	I've always wanted to go, and it's going to be, I'm just going to go.
	But this is going to be going in a lot of places in Europe.
	But I have to tell you, what is aside from the vacation aspect of it, and one of our sponsors here is Comp USA.
	And CompUSA is like Christmas morning for gadgets and gizmos and technology.
	I had a meeting with the CEO and the advertising people from Comp USA a couple weeks ago.
	They came here and they met with us out in our plush living room area here at the EIB Southern Command Complex.
	They had this gadget that they were all excited about and they gave me one and it's called a slingbox.
	And the name does not imply anything similar to what this thing does.
	What this does is allows you to watch your TiVo or your cable TV or whatever video source you want on your laptop anywhere in the world if you have a high-speed connection.
	So we were busy all last week when they were here, but we finally got around to hooking it up this week.
	And I've got it connected to the TiVo here.
	And we tested it and it works out.
	Right now it's only Windows compatible.
	But we worked on it, tested it out.
	You do need a high-speed connection.
	It'd be wireless or Ethernet.
	But the great thing about this, and you could use this, I guess, even if you're in the country, watch your own TiVo.
	If you're going to record things while you're gone, you can control every aspect of the TiVo or any aspect, any function of whatever video device you hook this thing to.
	So next week, when I am away in Europe, and let's say some news happens, I don't want to watch CN International.
	Have you ever traveled internationally and that's all you get is CN International and you get ESPN de Porta, which is nothing but soccer 24-7.
	Who cares?
	So if something big happens, if you just want to catch up on the news, turn on your TiVo from France or wherever you happen to be and you can watch it whenever you've recorded or watch it live.
	It's not HD compatible yet, but that's coming too.
	Right now, they've just got it set for the 480.
	So if you have an HD TV, it'll still work with that, but you've got to set the resolution to 480.
	Was it DPI, Brian, 480?
	Was it the number 480?
	Yeah, 480 DPI.
	That'll give you a good picture on it.
	But I'm just amazed by it.
	I think this is amazing.
	The picture is superb, and all these functions that you have with your TiVo, you have anywhere.
	The only thing is, you need a high-speed connection.
	If you don't have that, you'll get a choppy piece of video and so forth.
	But it carries the closed captioning if you use that.
	It carries the audio.
	You could, as Brian, you can connect it to the radio if you wanted to and have it give you whatever radio stations or programs that you wanted to listen to overseas while you're going.
	It's a fascinating thing.
	It's like $259.
	And, you know, you do have to have an internet connection.
	It goes in the back of your TiVo.
	And if you don't have that, there's a way of bridging it.
	It's not a simple install.
	I don't want to mislead you.
	It's not something you can do yourself in five or 10 minutes, but you can do it yourself.
	And it doesn't take too long.
	And it's very clear.
	The instructions are quite, I mean, I could figure it out so you can, but it's just a fascinating thing.
	And I'll be back on August 1st, which is our anniversary.
	Slingbox, Brian.
	Slingbox is what it's called.
	And it's only been out a month.
	It has only been out one month.
	Well, no, I'm not going to be watching the Sopranos.
	The Sopranos is not on right now.
	If I was going to watch Sopranos, I'd take DVDs.
	But no, like my lawyer, Roy Black's new TV show starts a week from tonight.
	It's called The Law Firm.
	It's one of these reality shows based on Trump's apprentice, only its lawyers.
	And I'll be able to watch that.
	No way will that be on television over in Europe.
	I'll be able to watch that or whatever I want to watch if I want to.
	I mean, I'm not going over there to watch television.
	It's not the point.
	I'm saying, like, there looks like a hurricane's forming right out there in the Bahamas, you guys.
	Have you seen this?
	It's just a wave right now.
	But I mean, if you look at the satellite, you can say, well, you know, I'm going to be leaving if I want to see if a hurricane destroyed my house.
	While I'm in Europe, I'll be able to turn on the weather channel.
	Snerdley's not smiling.
	It looks snerdly, like if it does form as a hurricane, it's going to miss us.
	But it's close.
	Call up the GOES floater number two, the loop, and watch this thing.
	You can see the floater satellite.
	Back to the phones now.
	Cliff in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
	Welcome, sir.
	Nice to have you on the program.
	Rush.
	It's an honor talking to you, sir.
	Thank you very much, sir.
	Long-time listeners since I guess 92.
	Well, I'm happy that you've been here that long, and I hope you're here as long as we are.
	Hey, I noticed it's an article in the LA Times that kind of opens the, maybe the opening salvo.
	It's not really a hit piece, but it opens up the issue of John Roberts' wife's views on abortion.
	Not his, his wife's.
	And she's apparently with an organization called Feminist for Life of America.
	Yes.
	Which is actually anti-abortion in spite of the sound of the name.
	And I'm just wondering how long it'll take before this and other things.
	You're wrong.
	You're saying this is not a hit piece.
	It's not written as a hit piece, but it's designed to be one.
	Let me translate this for you.
	What's going on is, well, you can't expect a nominee to answer questions about specific cases, Roe versus Wade.
	Well, you can't demand these judges answer.
	Well, we may not have to.
	His wife, look at his wife.
	She's a big pro-lifer.
	That gives us a little indication where he is.
	And so this is just designed to work up the lib opposition of the guy.
	The libs, you may not know it, but these people are dispirited.
	They're losing.
	They didn't keep any of those three judges off the circuit court they wanted off.
	They haven't succeeded in much, if anything, here.
	And they're frustrated.
	And now Bush has nominated this guy Roberts.
	And they say, we don't know anything about him.
	There's no way to go attack him.
	Oh, woe is us.
	What are we going to do?
	I don't even think we can filibuster this guy.
	Aha, looky here, his wife.
	Here's the headline.
	Wife of nominee holds strong anti-abortion views.
	While Supreme Court nominee John Roberts Jr.'s view on abortion triggered intense debate on Capitol Hill Wednesday, there's no mistaking where his wife stands.
	Jane Sullivan Roberts, a lawyer, is ardently against abortion, a Roman Catholic like her husband.
	That's code.
	You have to know how to read the code.
	Jane Roberts has been deeply involved in the anti-abortion move, but she provides her name, money, and professional advice to a small Washington organization, Feminists for Life of America, that offers counseling and educational programs.
	Their group has filed legal briefs before the high court challenging the constitutionality of abortion.
	This is most definitely a hit piece, Cliff.
	I mean, this is, you do have to know how to translate it, but this is the red flag being waved to every liberal in this country.
	Okay, we know who we got.
	Okay, it's time to march.
	It's time to run the ads.
	It's time to launch the salvo.
	It's time to take these people out.
	We can't trust them.
	Look at his wife.
	She's a wacko too.
	And then they're going to say, you know, these two just look too wholesome.
	Why don't we get a guy with a beard like Bork?
	Why don't we get somebody with a mustache like Bolton?
	Why didn't Bush nominate somebody we could make fun of the way they look?
	So they can't do that, but now they'll make fun of their clean, wholesome family life.
	Did you see his wife at the White House on Tuesday night?
	Right there wearing that Jackie Kennedy outfit.
	And did you see the little boy wearing the saddle shoes and the shorts and so forth?
	I mean, you go out and attack this family, you're going to be taking a risk because this is a pretty wholesome-looking family.
	Jennifer Palmieri, a spokeswoman for the Center for American Progress, which is a lib group actually that be called the Center for American Regression.
	It's unclear how all of this will affect her husband, said Jennifer Palmieri.
	It's possible that he would have a different view than her.
	It's just that in the absence of information about this guy, people are looking at her trying to read the tea leaves.
	Well, now, we could have some fun with this.
	We can have some good old-fashioned stereotypical fun.
	We could say, hey, he's a husband.
	He has no views until he talks to his wife.
	Hey, he has to ask his wife what his views are.
	But the bottom line here is, folks, that you have a wholesome family cut right from the mainstream in the heartland of this country, and that is evoking fear, palpable fear in the minds and hearts of the American left, and it's just pathetic.
	And now they're subtly attacking this woman as a means of getting to her husband on the basis that she's pro-life.
	I still to this day do not understand why they think they have a winning position with a majority of Americans when they come out against anybody who is for life.
	And make no mistake, this isn't life versus choice.
	You know what?
	I once ran a test on this very program.
	I had some feminists on the phone.
	I said, you know what?
	I've changed my mind.
	I am pro-choice.
	Really?
	Well, that's great.
	What caused you?
	What changed your mind?
	He said, well, nothing.
	I've always been pro-choice.
	I choose life.
	Well, that's not pro-choice.
	I said, aha, caught you.
	Pro-choice isn't pro-choice.
	You better choose the right side of it or you're not pro-choice.
	Pro-choice is simply another code label.
	It's pro-abortion.
	Pro-choice is simply to make it sound a little softer.
	But make no mistake, this is a hit piece.
	They're gunning for the guy via his wife.
	And she's fair game, they'll say, because she's a lawyer, too.
	We'll be back after this, folks.
	Don't go away.
	He just got the funniest and the cutest Club Gitmo picture.
	Two kids from Lexington, Kentucky, made a model of Club Gitmo with Legos and took a picture of themselves sitting next to them.
	It's huge.
	It's on the floor of their house.
	And we're in the process of posting it on the website now.
	But they're wearing the Gitmo t-shirts.
	They built a Club Gitmo model with their Legos and blocks.
	It's all labeled.
	The picture is all labeled to show you where the swimming pool is and the observation deck and the guest SUV is.
	Funny as it can be.
	We'll post the picture as soon as we, I'm sure Coco's working it.
	It's there now.
	Okay, Coco assures me that that picture is part of the photo gallery, the Club Gitmo photo gallery.
	I've been referencing this all day, so let me mention this to you, the Howard Feynman MSNBC piece.
	George W. Bush keeps surprising the wise guys.
	They keep thinking that he's going to be something other than what he is and he'll do something other than what he says he'll do, but he doesn't.
	Bush likes to pull surprises, but only on matters of timing.
	George Bush hides in plain sight, a tactic that works here, Washington, since everybody always assumes the game is all about misdirection.
	They expect, you know, they admired Bill Clinton for his deceit, his ability to fool people.
	They marveled at it.
	And here's Clinton, or Bush rather, visible in plain sight, doing what he says he's going to do.
	And he predictably does what he says he's going to do.
	And they still can't figure him out.
	And they're the ones that say he's the dunce and that they're the smart guys in the room.
	Let me grab line two here really quickly if we could.
	I'm going to go to Maya in Tampa.
	Maya, are you there?
	Welcome to the EIB network.
	Hi, Raj.
	Thanks for taking my call.
	You bet.
	I was a little concerned when I heard Senator Centorum make what I think was a connection between liberalism or a more liberal city having a priest who was molesting children.
	And I'm just wondering if you can try to further explain that to me because I'm a little shocked at what he said.
	Well, I don't have a problem understanding.
	I think I know what he meant.
	He's not saying that liberalism equals abuse of children by priests or anybody else.
	What he's saying is that you have a culture up in Boston, which is predominantly, it's the liberal mecca of this country.
	And one of the characteristics of that culture and liberalism is it's, as Bernard Goldberg said earlier, it's non-judgmentalism.
	Nobody's really wrong when they do anything.
	Who are we to judge what's right and wrong?
	What right do we have to impose our morality on anyone?
	And when you have a non-judgmental culture, when nobody's willing to look at something and say that's just wrong, then it simply lowers the guardrails and the impediments and enables that kind of behavior to go unchecked and perhaps unseen because those people live there, they're going to get away with this.
	Nobody's going to judge me.
	And even if I get caught, nobody's going to be really upset with me about this because they don't think it's their right to be upset with me.
	I can live my life and do what I want to do.
	And I think that's the characteristic here that not just Senator Santorum, but a lot of people have with liberalism.
	It's totally unwilling to have standards.
	Totally unwillingness.
	This is right and this is wrong.
	And boy, if somebody tries to do that and the libs come back at you, oh, you're just a simpleton.
	You see everything in black and white.
	You don't understand the nuance.
	You don't understand the possibilities that led to this.
	You don't understand the socioeconomic circumstances that we must understand.
	It's just like terrorism.
	Liberals want to ask terrorists, why do you hate us?
	What can we do to change so that you won't like, they will not judge the terrorists as bad guys.
	Howard Dean, well, I'm not going to rush to judgment on Osama bin Laden's guild.
	I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt.
	Nobody counts Tom DeLay, guilty.
	Karl Rove, guilty, because the one thing liberals are judgmental about is conservatism.
	That is a crime.
	Conservatism is wrong.
	Republicanism is wrong.
	And they make no bones about that.
	But when it comes to their own behavior, nobody's business.
	And there's always some explanation for it.
	So I don't think Senator Santorum is saying liberalism equals pedophilia.
	I think he's saying liberalism creates the circumstances where depravity can flourish.
	Whatever that depravity may be.
	We'll be back after this.
	Stay with us.
	Okay, folks, I can't get out of here without once again sharing with you the fact that many people have come to accept that the commercial that they're hearing during this program, George Soros slamming Karl Rove, is real.
	A Canadian journalist fell for it, wrote about it today.
	We found it.
	I have to come clean.
	As you know, a woman in Norman, Oklahoma also fell for this.
	This is ours.
	We did it.
	We illustrate absurdity by being absurd.
	And I'm going to miss being with all of you.
	It'll be back on Monday, August the 1st.
	And I just want to also remind you, when I'm gone, liberals might be more eager to take up arguments with you.
	But fear not, ladies and gentlemen.
	Understand what's happening.
	The liberal picks a fight with you.
	The mediocre always throw stones at the brilliant.
	Be confident.
	Be cool.
	Have a great time.
	We'll be back on Monday, August 1st.
	See you then.

▲