All Episodes
Previous Next
July 27, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:13
July 27, 2005, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh program, 1-800-282-2882.
What a great day to be in America.
Again, I'm reveling over the victory that I think turns a corner, at least in our corner of the world, preserving the Mount Soledad National War Memorial, 29 foot high cross and all.
77% of the vote yesterday in a special election that got national news because of course it replaces a mayor who resigned.
Two of our councilmen in the stripper gate found guilty by a federal jury of multiple federal felonies in connection with taking bribes and so forth and so on.
So we've had quite an exciting political season out here in San Diego.
But the more interesting of everything, and I think the more uh lasting achievement is the public standing once and for all for the founder's constitution, for freedom for religion, not from religion, and the idea that our Mount Soledad National War Memorial will be preserved.
Seeking to, and this caught my attention.
The Democratic Leadership Council, out of which came Bill Clinton in 1992, is seeking to uh bring the Democratic Party back into the center.
And even more radically than that.
Governor Tom Bilsack, Iowa governor who is the chair, uh, had this meeting and uh and told uh everybody at the DLC, the Democratic Leadership Council, quote, we've got to be for something.
And it's pretty clear America is waiting for us.
They're desperate to know what we're for, unquote.
Yes, Governor, that has been on the a question on our minds for quite some time.
We realize you're against every single thing George Bush does or says in every possible way.
It's evil because George Bush said it or did it, or wants to do it or proposed it, or whatever.
Well, what are you for?
And you've been losing elections.
May I be so bold as to offer this advice.
You've been losing elections because the general American common sense public looks at the leadership of your party and says, So when you guys get in, what are you gonna do?
What are you for?
Hillary Clinton made a speech there as well, and this has got the left very upset.
She said that uh that the Democrats have to move to the middle and stand up for values, calling for an ideological ceasefire between left and right within the Democratic Party.
Confirmation by the front runner for the Democratic Party's nomination for president in 2008, Hillary Clinton, confirmation by her, that the party, the Democratic Party, is split.
Split horribly, split badly, split between left and far left and kooky left.
And that's the where they are.
They're on the left, and there's the far left, then there's the kooky left, the insurgent left, the uh the internationalist uh communist left.
And those people, that little tail out there, the you know, vast number of Democrats are middle of the road Americans.
But out there on the left, left, left, the tail is wagging that whole dog.
I mean, consider the fit that Chuck Schumer, according to the spectator, threw uh the fit, that's the way they described it, that he threw when he thought, as uh Hillary Clinton announced that she would not oppose the nomination of Judge John Roberts to the Supreme Court.
Here is uh Chuck Schumer, her seat mate from New York, saying that he thought it was a classic Clinton triangulation, leaving him out on a limb by saying, well, you know, Roberts appears to be, um, by the way, the poll numbers are great.
Uh let's see, uh USA Today's CNN Gallup.
Uh 59 to 22, say Robert should be confirmed to the Supreme Court.
59% to 22%.
Then the Democrats read the polls.
They go, you know what?
Yeah, opposing this guy is not exactly uh right before the election of next year, the way to position ourselves.
Schumers feels like he's out on a limb and got caught in the triangulation, you know, the Morris triangulation strategy that Clinton followed.
And he feels like uh Hillary's following it too.
Well, duh, she wants to win.
Not that she is any more moderate or common sense or centrist, but she has to appear to be.
And the left doesn't understand that.
Uh, let's see.
Um the left, Daily Coss out of Berkeley, California, called Clinton's speech, quote, truly disappointing.
Um Let's see.
The New Democrat Network, which is a way left group, said, quote, if she wanted to give a speech to a centrist organization truly interested in bringing the various factions of the party together, she would have worked with the NDN.
Unquote.
So, ladies and gentlemen, the Democratic Party, even under the whip of Hillary Clinton, is not about to unite or stand for much of anything.
Speeches by Governor Vilsack to the contrary, notwithstanding.
What they're for, you can only glean from the daily press.
For example, now perhaps this is a harsh example.
You bring up your example, I'd be happy to get into this.
What are the Democrats for?
Here's what they're for in Miami, where the Democrats control the municipal government in Miami.
Miami city leaders apologizing today for a summer camp program they ran called a watermelon watermelon eating contest, unquote.
The uh largely black group of kids went to the ghetto style talent show at the summer camp to engage in the watermelon eating contest.
The Miami Parks director, Ernest Burkeen, who is black, released a formal apology and announced the renaming of the talent show.
Now it's called the Funky Talent Show.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, is this what they're for?
Is this the Sheets bird wing that I that uh of the uh of the Democrat Party?
I'm I'm desperately getting around to trying to figure out what are they for.
Now, for instance, I I got this.
I I'm and here's the second one on the list.
They are for making manufacturers of guns guilty for the crimes committed by people who use the guns in crime.
Huh?
Yeah, let me go through that one more time.
I know it doesn't make sense.
I'm just saying this is what they're for.
As the assault weapons ban expired with a whimper last year, the Democrats regrouped, you know, the gun control Democrats regrouped.
Now they want, and uh there are lawsuits all over the place now, 25 major lawsuits, lots of cities involved, New York and Washington, D.C., two of them, in front of uh highly creative judges, suits that could drag on for years, alleging that just because um Mr. X held up the convenience store and shot the owner, that the manufacturer uh of that gun ought to be held liable for the death.
Hello.
Uh that flies in the face of about 1,200 years of the way we think about crime.
Crime is committed by people.
Crime is committed by the decision of people to commit a crime.
What they use in the crime, club, knife, gun, SUV, uh gitmo t-shirt, I don't know what whatever they use, club git mode gear, I don't know, whatever they use in the crime, it does not mean that the person who made that item is guilty of the crime.
The item is perfectly legal and used in legal contexts.
If if it can be used in an illegal context, does that mean the person who built it is going to be guilty of the crime?
Because if you extend that logic, we can't build anything more in the United States.
We're done.
So that's what the Democrats stand for.
Here's the latest from the Washington Times.
Uh they have a Democrats have a uh Social Security proposal, counterproposal out at long last called Amerisave.
Amerisave.
Their idea is that after we pay all the taxes that are levied now and will be levied in the future, should there be a Democrat president.
Whatever we have left that we haven't applied to our personal bills, whatever is left, the crumbs off the table that we applied to our Personal bills, we better start saving more of that.
Because all the government programs that we've kicked the tax money into aren't going to be sufficient when we're retired.
So please start saving more.
Now, if that isn't an admission, that the government programs are failing, I don't know what is.
Now they want us to save more of the money they've that is left over after they've taken.
So that 401k, and and you know what?
I actually agree with this.
We ought to have more savings in 401ks.
And and the first thing you do is lift lift the uh limit.
There's a limit on what you can put into your own 401k in a given year.
Why is there a limit?
If I want to save more than the next guy, how come I can't save more?
And put it aside.
Oh, oh, I know.
Huh.
What was I thinking?
If I save more, I'll have more.
If I'll have more, I'll probably vote Republican to save it from being confiscated when I'm retired, which is what Clinton did in 93 when he raised the tax on Social Security.
See, I've been watching the Democrats.
I know what they do.
If I have more, they'll take more.
If I have more, I'll I'll be voting Republican to keep them from taking more.
By the way, since a part of this program on an almost daily basis has to be devoted to giving you the good news you can't get anywhere else in any other media about the successes of the Bush administration, may I, and I have reached that point in the program.
Now I'm being told, no, I haven't.
I've reached a break.
All right, let me come back with the good news of what is working.
I know this is so rare a moment.
You may want to just pause, call your friends, gather around, hold hands, and think for a moment, just mmm, oh, and try to get the fact that we're now going to vibe you with it's a little California talk there.
Vibe you with some good news.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, in for Rush after this.
Welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh program here at the EIB Network.
Roger Hedgecock from KOGO Radio in San Diego.
Filled in for rush today and tomorrow and having a lot of fun.
I know what rush means now, having more fun than a human being should have.
This is, and because there's such good news for the Bush administration, and this is the um in many, many respects, and I want to pick up on one of them that the president emphasized when he was running first in his first term, uh talking about education reform, more than anything else, I guess, except tax cuts in that uh in that first campaign.
And uh and here was um uh here was a coming out of Texas, a governor of Texas saying, look, uh, you can emphasize the basics, you can improve education, you can create a more literate generation than we have been doing.
Public education doesn't need to fail, which it demonstrably is.
So what happened?
Well, according to, and this is an independent group now, the National Assessment of Educational Progress.
This group um publishes a yearly report.
They've been doing it since the early 1970s, taking a uh representative sample of nine, 13, and 17-year-olds in the uh K-12 system in public education.
They've been doing it since the early 1970s.
This year's report contains two striking results.
The first result is that America's nine-year-olds posted their best scores in reading and math since the tests were introduced in 1971 in reading and 73 in math.
That's 30 years plus.
See, I was pretty good at math too.
Uh 30 years plus, whatever it is, it's 30 plus years.
And the best, so the nine-year-olds had the best scores in reading and math since the t since this group has been looking at them.
The second striking result of this year's report is that the gap between the achievement of white students and the achievement of minorities is narrowing.
Nine-year-olds, by the way, who made the biggest gains of all were black nine-year-olds, who were the farthest behind uh when this all started to be uh looked at.
Now, why is that?
Well, ladies and gentlemen, what George Bush did when he got into office is take his Texas emphasis on basics to the federal level with no child left behind, which is far from being perfect, like most laws, and has all kinds of defects we can talk about and get pessimistic about,
but the fact is that the overall emphasis and the reward and uh uh and uh punishment sections of No Child Left Behind have filtered down, if only in attitude and emphasis, to every school district in this country.
That's the only thing that's changed.
The other thing has changed is nine-year-olds and particularly nine-year-old blacks are doing a lot better in reading and math.
And that's a real good thing.
Now, I want to get to well, let's get a call in here first.
Here's uh Alan in Richmond, Virginia.
Alan, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hey, Roger, good to talk to you.
Um this American thing, I think we need to form the uh like national organization for the finding of liberal grain matter.
I mean, there's so many of these things out there.
And do they think we're as stupid as they are that we would buy a plan that that we do every day already?
I mean, I I don't understand their point behind this.
They basically they sit down for six months to come up with a plan that means absolutely nothing, and we're supposed to buy it.
Well, it does mean something specific that you ought to be aware of, Alan, according to press reports, this is in the Washington Times today.
The Democratic's uh the Democrats plan for getting people to save more includes, of course, bigger government and more s expenditure.
Through a tax refund, the Democrats plan would match dollar for dollar, the first $1,000 that an individual contributes to a an individual retirement account, 401k or some similar account.
And it would also provide a tax credit for employers who offer these saving plans, encouraging employers to automatically enroll employees in these type of accounts.
The plan is estimated to cost taxpayers 75 billion dollars over ten years.
So what they want to do is take money out of your paycheck at one end, stick it in on the other end, and then say, look, here's what we're doing for you.
I don't even need what I want with it.
Yeah.
No.
See, that's the difference.
Well, I I think we've highlighted today anyway, again, the difference between Republicans and Democrats.
Appreciate the call, Alan.
Here's Gwen in Cleveland, Ohio.
Gwen, welcome to the program.
Hi, Roger.
I'm really excited to talk to you today.
Hey, thanks for calling.
What's up?
Well, I'm a school teacher, and um I was interested in your comment about the No Child Left Behind Act.
Yeah.
And what I see is that it pushes education to the forefront and it makes parents um be even more accountable for their kids' education.
And you know, teachers can't do it alone.
And when the parents are also more involved, you're gonna have uh better success.
There isn't any question about that, and there isn't any question that parent parental responsibility has been falling down in this country horribly.
I agree.
There isn't there isn't any question that we've also neutered our teachers.
They can't discipline, they can't uh get rid of troublemakers, they can't uh uh uh foster a learning uh attitude in the classroom without being called uh uh harassers or discriminating or any of that other stuff that happens to teachers all the time, every day.
It's just like the cops.
We've asked these people to do a uh uh an important job, a critical job, and then we've taken away the tools to do that job.
You are absolutely correct.
And it's one of the most frustrating uh parts of education, and I think that's one of the reasons why we're having such a difficult time recruiting competent teachers in the field.
Well, that's true, too.
Gosh, we have so much problem out here, it's just an amazing.
So the people we do get to teach are ideological leftists, uh radical lesbians, you know, et cetera, et cetera.
They're the ones going into teaching.
It's just crazy.
I I agree.
I feel like a minority many times.
Well, I appreciate your service uh because it's uh it's so important.
Education couldn't be more important without an educated citizenry, our constitution can be shredded this way and that, and nobody will know the difference.
Absolutely.
Yeah.
Hey, thanks uh for the call.
I appreciate it.
We are uh I want to get into the uh Durbin's latest uh Senator Durbin.
Did this guy wait his whole life to be this uh um popular?
Uh Richard Durbin from uh Illinois has asked a question of Judge uh John Roberts that has brought a reaction.
And the reaction has uh brought up some very interesting political back and forth on this Roberts' nomination to the Supreme Court that I want to get into, and then of course into CAFTA, the President is meeting the Central American free trade agreement like NAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement is Uh up before the House today, very, very much a squeaker, ladies and gentlemen, between free trade and protectionist uh impulses here.
And the president is on Capitol Hill talking to the Republicans to try to get uh some uh consensus on which way the Republicans are going to vote in the House after it did pass the Senate.
We'll get into that as well.
But Senator Durbin's religious litmus test in the party of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, a Catholic.
Senator Durbin proposes a Catholic litmus test for the Supreme Court after this.
Welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh program.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, uh coming at you from the left coast here at San Diego, California, where we had a terrific victory yesterday and in a special election.
Seventy-seven percent of the uh city voters agreeing that the uh cross uh incorporated into and part of the Mount Soledad National War Memorial on Mount Soledad uh near La Jolla, that that uh cross uh should be kept.
The land should be transferred to the feds for inclusion in a federal war memorial system that includes war memorials with crosses, for instance, at Gettysburg and Arlington, et cetera.
And this uh this uh was a surprising result.
Seventy-seven percent.
So where you are fighting these culture wars against atheists and ACLU and all of that to try to shred the founder's constitution and substitute some other meaning, for example, freedom from religion instead of freedom of religion.
Uh this is a kind of victory that I want you to savor with me.
All right, let's get to the phones.
Mike in Boca Raton, Florida.
Hi, Mike, welcome to the Rush Show.
Yeah.
Hello?
Yeah, hi.
Yeah, I just was calling because I'm pregnant with anticipation, waiting for you to tell me all the good things that uh our great president has done for us in the last five and a half years.
You talked about a uh a program of No Child Left Behind, which to the best of my knowledge is nothing more than an unfunded mandate by the federal government.
So uh, you know, I don't know what you you're talking that it's such a great thing that he's done for us.
Well, as I was as I was saying, uh there's obviously a lot of criticism, right, left, and center about the uh details of No Child Left Behind.
Uh certainly a lot of uh of debate about it, but there's no debate about the fact that the emphasis on reading, writing, and math has resulted in smarter nine-year-olds and better grades and m people more prepared to live in the real world and get a real education out of public education, and I think Mike, that's a plus, don't you?
Well, absolutely it's a plus, but there's nothing in the United States is done for our educational system.
And look at Florida, where his brother is the governor.
I mean, we've got one of the worst educational systems in the United States of America.
Well, the connection I made, the connection I made, uh, Mike, and that's of course your Floridian problem, but the connection I made was that Mr. Bush promises the United States of America problem.
Are you an American?
Mr Mr. Bush uh was the author of the No Child Left Behind bill, which is credited for the improvements that you just agreed were good.
It's an unfunded mandate.
It doesn't mean anything but the paper that it's written on until they put money behind it.
So, yeah, I don't know.
Uh unfunded mandate.
Explain yourself.
If you've got to be able to do that, we're spending the best thing that you've done in his five years.
Well, you're spending through the barely pinnacle thing that he's done of dollars.
I'm waiting.
I'm pregnant with anticipation.
No, sir, you're just done so good for you.
You're just running off at the mouth because you don't have a slightest clue what you're talking about.
You just agreed with me.
You're gonna tell me that no child left No child left behind L let's do Mike, just shut up for just a minute, please.
You're trying to tell me that you agree that no child left behind has raised test scores, and that's a good thing.
Then in the same breath, without even pausing, you give me the contradictory thought that it's an unfunded mandate, whatever that means, and therefore it's evil, and what else has he done for us in five years?
I I just wanted to devote a certain portion of the program to the good news you will never hear anywhere else in the media.
But why is that?
Now that's another thing that you you people in the Republican Party or the conservative movement says it's a liberal bias.
Everyone knows as somewhat educated at all.
There is no liberal bias in the media any longer.
It's all gosh.
Yeah.
Okay, so uh Mike, can you cite another place where the these uh waiting for you to tell me the absolute number no best thing that you guys can hang your head on?
I'm sorry.
I know you're used to just interrupting people and and never allowing me to answer one of your questions, but I want to answer one of your questions.
Can you tell me with respect?
No, you're not.
You're interrupting me every time you can.
No, you're you're just a void question.
You're pregnant with ignorance, Mike, and I'm gonna cut off this uh conversation now because we can't have it, and I know the rest of the audience is simply frustrated by the inability of you to come to grips with a thought that doesn't contradict what you said two seconds before.
There is no other place that I have found other than the Economist magazine that these figures of test score improvement in math and reading because of the No Child Left Behind mandates, unfunded or not, there's no other place I've read that test scores are going up in public education because of George Bush and what he and Ted Kennedy did in the No Child Left Behind Bill.
Haven't seen it anywhere.
If you've seen it anywhere, call and tell me.
Here's Brad in Indianapolis.
Hi, Brad.
Hello.
Hello, sir.
How are you?
Hi, good.
You know, you touched on a topic that's near and dear to my heart today, which is really the main reason why I'm calling as far as what do Democrats believe in.
And it just seems that it's a huge issue that we can center around, and nobody ever asked that question.
Rush always talks about the arena of ideas.
But I you know, I listen to the to talk radio all day long, you watch TV, you watch the news, you hear even write, you know, Republican politicians, but it's never put back in Democrats' laps effectively to say articulate what you believe in.
And it's it just seems that it's a such a winning position for us to take that it amazes me why it's never asked.
Um occasionally I'll hear somebody call in when you host, and and they'll say, you know, I'm from the left, don't necessarily believe what you believe, but then you put it back on them and say, well, I'll answer your question, but tell me what you believe in, and they never do.
No.
And it just seems that that question's not asked enough, and I wondered if you knew why.
Because they're they're caught in a rut.
If you heard this last caller, uh, for example, as a good example, he's caught in the rut of anti-Bush, it's become an obsession.
It's become it's become uh, I think a diagnosable disease among activist Democrats that they're so caught up after the the stealing of the election in Florida and you know the first term and the second term where where uh the the the uh swift boat veterans and the and the sneaky and and all that, they're just so caught up and fanatic and anti-Bush that they can't see anything else.
They have defined themselves as the anti-Bush, and that's all they are.
Ask where is the new proposals.
If you don't like the war in Iraq, where's your war on terror proposal?
Where's your plan to safeguard America?
Where's your plan to uh save Social Security from the inevitable bankruptcy of overpromising and underfunding?
Where's your plan?
In other words, on any of the topics of the day for which common sense, ordinary everyday Americans are asking the political system, listen, come to grips here.
Come to grips here.
These are issues.
They affect us, they affect our safety, they affect our financial future, they affect us and our families.
What are your ideas?
They're getting ideas from George Bush.
May not all be great, may not all be the total solution.
I'm a, you know, a big critic of the administration on immigration and other issues will bring up the next hour.
But George Bush has a positive program of ideas.
The Democrats do not.
Governor Vilsack admitted it much as much at the Democrat Leadership Council convention in Ohio just last week.
He said it.
We've got to have positive.
We've got to stand for something, he said.
Yeah, sooner or later you really do.
That's my point.
Now, fun stuff with Senator Durbin, who is a Catholic, uh, at least that's what he says, in Illinois, out of Illinois, and apparently in the green room at some uh NBC broadcast, the green room being the boat they put people who are gonna be guests on these programs, and uh one was coming and one was going,
and uh uh mister it was Mr. uh Senator um uh Durbin and uh George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley who wrote in the Los Angeles Times a column saying that um if Roberts is a devout Catholic if John Roberts if Judge Roberts nominated to the Supreme Court is a devout Catholic and
the Catholic church considers something immoral like abortion which is before the court what would he do?
What would Judge Roberts do in the Supreme Court under that circumstance?
And Judge Roberts in this column by Professor Turley was reported to have said well I'd have to um I'd have to recuse myself I I'd have to step aside now A, that's the wrong answer uh for just personal my personal thing uh and let's assume that that's the answer he did give let's assume that this happened because Mr. Turley in his column said that it was Senator Durbin that was his source for this.
Senator Durbin, because he then got criticized, wait a minute Durbin, do you mean to tell me you're gonna ask John Roberts to have a religious test to be a Supreme Court nominee.
Are you really saying that committed Catholics cannot be Supreme Court members if they have to recuse themselves on these important issues?
Even assuming that's the right answer, which I don't think it is are you really saying Senator Durban in contravention of the plain meaning of the U.S. Constitution which forbids a religious test for public office?
Are you really saying you want a religious test?
You're gonna ask John Roberts the Catholic question?
Durbin today's backpedaling like crazy like he always does he goes out and says these outrageous things says well I you know why why did anybody pick up on that?
I said that in the green room I didn't mean that to be you know just like he's the last one was down on the Senate floor.
Rush publicizes what he says about Hitler and Gitmo and all that stuff and then he gets mad because somebody noticed what he said on the Senate floor.
Now somebody notices what he says in the green room at NBC and he's mad.
He did acknowledge he's the source for the newspaper column but he says Jonathan uh Turley did not correctly capture the private conversation Mr. Durbin's office clarified that quote Judge Roberts said repeatedly he would follow the rule of law unquote well nobody's backing down and it leaves the question do we now have a test a religious test?
Are we now on the verge of preventing people in public office because they're Catholic I thought the Democratic Party Senator Durbin got past this in 1960 when John F. Kennedy asserted that his Catholicism would in no way hinder him from being an effective president of the United States I thought we got past this.
I'm Roger Hedgecock on the Rush Show back after this welcome back to the Rush Show.
Roger Hedgecock filling in for Rush Limbaugh here today and tomorrow.
So I get a chance to send all kinds of email we'll talk about tomorrow as a result of the stuff we covered today.
By the way, what's this?
I mean, folks in the West Coast are lampooned constantly.
I'm from San Diego.
And I just look at New York, though, and say, gosh, I don't know.
You guys shouldn't be calling the kettle black here.
Editor Jason Epstein, who was the longtime editorial director at Random House, founder of the New York Review of Books, and husband of jailed New York Times reporter Judith Miller, has not been seen lately at the federal facility in Virginia where his wife has been incarcerated for not giving up her sources.
She's been there for the past three weeks.
Where has Jason Epstein been?
Well, according to the New York Daily News, Mr. Epstein is aboard the luxury ocean liner Silver Shadow in a celeb-glutted Mediterranean cruise while she's down sweltering in the federal facility in Virginia in the 110-degree heat, eating bologna and being brutalized by prison matrons, ornogs, or whatever it is that's going on down there.
To the phones here's Bruce in Houston, Texas Bruce hi.
Hello hello quick thing on Robert and Turley Supreme Court justices do not apply the law.
What they do is they decide whether or not a law is constitutional.
They apply the Constitution.
Correct.
The question in this case is not whether or not his religious views conflict with the law, it's whether he is in confliction with the Constitution.
A very different issue, and one that curly did not ask.
No, and a very important point because law professors and Democratic senators today believe, as Senator Schumer has said publicly, that the Supreme Court makes law.
This is a fundamental violation of the Constitution.
Fundamental.
If you believe in the separation of powers, that we have a judicial, legislative, and executive branch, and each of those branches has a separate function and a balancing function between the three in order to preserve our liberties.
If you believe that, then you cannot have a Supreme Court, quote, making law, unquote.
As far as abortion goes, what Robert should say is that he fully supports all parts of the Constitution that were used in Roe versus White.
And then it'll get deadly silent on the other side as everybody flips through their copies trying to find those sections.
But he just says, I'm I fully support all sections that were used to decide Roe versus Wade.
And that's the end of that issue.
I think it is too.
Appreciate the call, Bruce.
By the way, Roberts, I'm starting to like this guy more and more as they've given, as they've uh released, what was it yesterday?
75,000 pieces of paper.
And of course the Democrats who demanded the release said, that's not enough.
As if these guys could read 75,000 pages.
They don't even have enough interns that aren't being harassed to uh to read 75,000 pages.
Um what has been released is interesting.
Because time and again in his role as solicitor general uh in the solicitor general's office uh representing the executive branch in his earlier years, time and again uh as a judge, John Roberts has opted for limitations on the judiciary, limitations on court.
Do you have standing to be here?
Is this a question I should be deciding?
Is this an issue that uh should be before this court?
Is this an issue that shouldn't be at the legislature, at the executive branch, even to the point of uh of contradicting.
Let me find that in the uh stack here.
Contradicting another uh hero of mine, Ted Olson, Theodore Olson, uh, who became a solicitor uh general in 2001.
Back in 1982, Olsen was suggesting it would be politically advantageous for the Reagan administration to oppose limits on court powers in a complicated issue.
And Roberts was at odds with that.
He said, always and everywhere, our position ought to be that courts should be limited to what the Constitution provides for courts to do, even though there may be a political advantage to us to play the game the Democrats do of trying to get the courts to be the place of last resort to enact legislation they can't get through the legislature.
The Sky Roberts gets better every day.
59% yes on Roberts in the CNN Gallup poll, 22% no.
You wonder why Hillary Clinton is endorsing him?
That's why.
AP reporting uh Wichita, Kansas judge has waived the usual 60-day waiting period and granted an immediate divorce yesterday to um Paula Rader, the wife of BTK serial killer Dennis Rader.
Paula Rader in her divorce petition said that her mental and physical condition had been adversely affected by the marriage.
She said she's incompatible with Dennis.
She had no idea that his sexual fantasies had driven him to kill ten people in the Wichita area.
But he was clearly incompatible.
Good call, Judge.
Um, while Rush is away, podcasting the guest host shows.
I love it.
For members of the Rush 24-7, and by the way, check out the Club Gitmo Gallery, Rush Limbaugh.com.
Keep those pictures coming.
The Club Gitmo stuff at the EIB store is fun too.
And then you email the photo of yourself wearing the club gitmo gear, and uh it'll get in there.
It's Club Gitmo at Rushlimbod.com.
It'll be posted on the Club Gitmo Gallery, updated daily.
▲
Export Selection