All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 16, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:41
August 16, 2005, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
All right, enough with the Madonna jokes.
I can't tell them anyway, so I don't want to know them.
I'll just tell you one of them.
I'm a stunned that members of my staff even think this way.
So Rush, what part of the horse was Madonna riding?
I don't want to hear any more, you guys.
All right, greetings, welcome back.
Rush Limball the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, where we have more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
And uh love uh love having you along for the rod.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at eIBNet.com.
All right, Bloomberg's website, why are Americans sour about everything?
Kevin Hassettz, the writer, director of economic policy studies at AEI, chief economic advisor to John McCain during the 2000 primaries.
He says Americans are in a sour and pessimistic mood.
President Bush's job approval rating is an unimpressive 42%.
And speaking of that.
So I I'm not sure I accept the premise of the piece.
Why are Americans sour about everything?
But I know there's some are.
I mean, I I don't think they're sour about everything.
This this guy, I just cut to the chase.
This guy's theory is it's not the economy, it's Iraq.
That it's the news coming out of Iraq.
He says there are only two possibilities.
Either Americans see an economic reversal coming, and we're headed to bad economic times, or that the data uh are fine in the economy, and Americans are upset about something else, and I think it's the latter.
I think that something else is Iraq, says uh Mr. Hassett.
As for the polls on the economy, they're a little more than a side show.
They don't signal that poor people aren't keeping up, that oil prices are high, or that the economy is about turned down.
The polls don't show any of that.
Um they're measuring political sediment, not economic sediment.
Now about this this poll, uh, and I talked about this poll when it came out, this AP poll that showed uh Bush's job approval rating an unimpressive 42% uh went to uh Brent Bozell's news site, the Media Research Center has uh has a site called Newsbusters.com out there, and they've got a they got a little post here from uh Lyford Beverage uh yesterday afternoon about five o'clock.
The main political headline from the AP today is the results of an AP poll taken a week ago, Bush approval a low for recent two termers, reports that President Bush's job approval down to 42% with 55% disapproving.
That certainly sounds disturbing, or at least it would be if he were running for anything again, but looking at the poll again, something suspicious jumps out.
The partisan divide for Bush is stark.
80% of Democrats disapprove of his overall performance, while nearly 90% of Republicans approve.
Now, for the past several years, the conventional wisdom has been of a 50-50 America, a country divided evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
Republicans have beaten Democrats at the national level in the last several election cycles.
So if the numbers are fairly close, and the Republican approval rating is higher than the Democrat disapproval rating, how can his approval rating be that bad?
If 38% of the sample is Democratic and 38% is Republican, then he'd have to have a 0% approval rating among independents to have an overall 42% approval, and that's not realistic.
So I went digging around the uh AP Ipsos website, and I found the top-line results.
What they got is a sample of adults rather than registered voters, and get this.
Once again, they skewed the sample.
39% Republicans, 49% Democrats.
So that 42% approval rating that they're flouting is a fake number, a number that doesn't represent political reality, but it certainly sounds bad for the president, which seems to be the AP's purpose.
So they report a poll with 39% Republican participation, 49% Democrat, as Bush with a 42% approval rating, and yet 90% of Republicans approve and 80% disapprove.
The poll is worthless.
It's irrelevant.
It and it's like a recent LA Times poll, same same skewed sample.
That poll is worse than worth the trash can.
So the lead of this uh man's column, President Bush's job approval rating is an unimpressive 42%, according to the latest AP poll, but we know the poll is uh is flawed.
So his theory is that it's Iraq, that there's just a general sour attitude about about Iraq.
Um I think it's as I say, I I I'm not joking here.
The only time I run into a consistently sour attitude is in Connecticut.
I have friends up there, and I go up and visit them now and then, and uh they have friends over for dinner, we go over to their house.
It's just it's just it's just depressing.
But it's all about Hillary and the media in the New York Times.
And it's all about how the Republicans aren't doing anything to counter it.
It's like living in a time warp.
And then I have to stop, remember, okay, it's Connecticut, it's a blue state, and they don't think they're winning anything, and um many of them might not know where some of the red states of the country are themselves.
You know, it's the Northeast, even though they're good Republicans.
So I examine it further beyond beyond Connecticut, places I go, people I run into, do I run into a universally sour attitude?
No, I don't.
But I know it's there because I get emails from people who you can tell are sour.
But I think there's something else uh that that is actually a combination of two things.
And one of these things is very predictable.
I think it's the media.
Uh I uh you you just you just can't escape it.
Uh and to the extent that Iraq uh is a factor in whatever sour attitude you that's owing to the media.
There's simply no question about that.
We had the story yesterday in the New York Times about local uh newspaper editors who carry AP stories about Iraq, finally getting emails from people.
Hey, wait a minute, I'm getting a whole different story from people who are coming back from Iraq, and they're writing letters to the editor.
So the editors finally call the AP and say, wait a minute, is this true?
3100 schools have been opened, and there's all kinds of new things happening there, and the water supply is better than it's ever been.
Uh and the AP says, well, we're not really sure.
Uh we're we're afraid if we leave our hotels, we'll get shot.
Upshot is they're not out there reporting what's going on in Iraq.
They're reporting the deaths, they're reporting the car bombs.
We get the obligatory story every day that it has a picture of a bombed-out car with a graphic that talks about how many Iraqis are dead and how many Americans are dead, and the steady, steady diet of that.
There's no question that can have a deleterious impact on one's mood, because this is our country.
But even beyond Iraq, uh the media in general, uh, I don't care whether it's television shows, I don't care whether it's music, I don't care whether it's uh it's it's news, it's it's predominantly run by liberals, and it's it's it's it's peppered with pessimism, defeatism, and when you get to the extremes of it, like this Sheehan circus, you have to conclude that there are Americans out there actually hoping we we lose.
Now that's not encouraging.
That's not going to make you feel robust and happy.
Uh but even at that, uh I think there's something larger.
I think there's a reality that life on this planet today consists of several challenges.
And that we are we're not isolated.
You know, if you go back to the 90s, the Clinton administration purposely avoided tackling anything serious.
They avoided making uh big issues part of their agenda.
It was everything's happy, go lucky.
We bisbeat the Soviets, uh peace, peace dividend, we're spending that.
We're gonna have his $10 billion surplus or whatever it was, and everybody's happy, the economy was roaring.
We had a great soap opera reality show going on in the White House with cigars and and uh and oral sex uh and that that went on for three or four years, and that was entertaining.
Um we had little little respites from it, Elion Gonzalez.
Uh that got people fired up.
Uh but but on the whole, it was a pretty uh it was it was a pretty innocent decade uh because we were insulated from we had terrorist acts.
We didn't do anything about it.
We didn't act like uh they meant anything because they really didn't happen on this on our soil, other than the one on um February 26th of 1993, but we didn't do anything about that other than try to take these guys to court.
Um, You know, we had some the embassy bombings late in the Clinton years.
We fired some missiles at janitors in Iraq and an ibuprofen factory in the Sudan and an empty uh terrorist training camp in Afghanistan.
We didn't do anything about it.
Nobody was really talking about the threat posed.
But then all of a sudden, here comes 9-11.
And that's that's that's a huge wake-up call.
We had an administration in place, and oh, we got to do something about this.
And so uh we're in the process of doing something about it.
And when you then this is seminal point here, folks, it's just like Vietnam, and you've got the Democrats trying to replay that for their own political gain.
Do you realize how much more successful we would be if the country were united in the effort?
I mean, it's sad to really realize this.
It is sad to really realize just you you want to change the mood in this country.
Have everybody on this country's side that lives in this country.
And every American on our countryside.
I mean, you're gonna have some, you're gonna have some wackos that are, you know, the Ramsey Clarks of the world and so forth, but we got a whole major political party that is oriented toward this country's defeat so that they can blame it on the sitting president.
And that's very disquieting to people.
And it's got them scratching their heads.
What I don't understand this.
Why are we celebrating people who are celebrating American deaths?
Why are we why are we making heroes out of people who are actively seeking the defeat of the country?
Why is the media doing this?
And and then the realization that you've got the oil price going up, we don't seem to be able to do much about it.
Well, we never have been able to, because we're not allowed to create our own supply.
We're not allowed to drill for.
We've always been held hostage to this OPEC gang.
Nothing's nothing's new about that.
But yet we've, and these these price hikes are cyclical.
We had we had percentage jumps this high starting in the 70s, all through the 70s.
We had the same degree of upset and panic back then, or well, we did have some panic back then, we have panic now, but I actually think country's doing quite well with all of the barrage that we're being hit with day in and day out.
And I think the proof of that is the economy.
I think the fact that the people are up and the people are serious, that the people of this country are making it work.
That despite this never-ending barrage of defeatism and pessimism and fatalism, the people of this country are going out and creating a roaring economy.
But then they're hit with all these stories about bad economic stories uh in select sectors of the of the country, and so they well, I'm doing well, but gee, maybe my neighbor isn't, so I shouldn't feel so good that I'm doing well, because I don't, I don't, you know, I want to have compassion.
So there's a there's a constant barrage in this country from mostly from people on the left that want other people to be miserable.
The left is itself mired in misery.
They're they they want everybody to be as miserable as they are.
I touched on this in my highly acclaimed monologue of yesterday, which is now available free at rushlimbaugh.com, text, audio, and ditto cam.
But these are people that that that wallow in misery.
Their happiness is as many other people being miserable as they are.
The more misery they can spread, the more success they think they're having.
And then there's the you add to it the guilt of being happy when you think somebody else isn't.
I ought to temper the way I feel because others aren't doing so.
Why do you think that?
You're being told it.
But how many of you people actually run into other people who are in a totally sour, foul mood about the country?
They may be in a sour, foul mood about the media and the way it's covering stories in the country and giving all this acclaim to people like Cindy Sheehan, but a foul mood, foul and sour about the country, I don't see it.
Not at a majority of Americans.
But there's there's there's clearly an effort being made to um uh affect as many people's moods as possible in this being done uh on the basis of an upcoming election or two, 2006 and 2008.
And of course, it's a it's a redoubled effort because you know, if you go if you study politics at all, you understand that a roaring economy will trump everything at election time.
The back pocket issues.
Well, those are those are those are doing great right now.
Democrats, liberals are panicking.
How do we overcome that?
We've got to make people feel miserable.
So, folks, I just have a suggestion to you.
And the same suggestion, the same uh the same idea I have when we're going to have a recession.
When somebody says we're headed to a recession, just say, okay, fine, you go ahead and have one, I'm not going to participate.
When you hear that the country's in a bad mood, you'll go ahead, I'm not going to be in one.
Because it's up to you.
You have the ultimate control of what your mood is.
You do.
You're not, you you you, you know, you you can learn to be insulated from the uh people that are trying to make you feel rotten.
You don't have to let them succeed.
You really don't.
And you'll be amazed if you don't let them succeed.
You go on around and act like you're enjoying the the gift of life and enjoying enjoying the uh the fruits of your labors.
It's contagious.
Uh it will influence others to feel the same way.
So don't fall prey to it.
There's an ongoing effort to spread misery and call it equality in this country, but just say, hey, you know, I have I have control of it.
I choose not to be miserable.
And I'm not going to feel guilty about it.
You have every right to do both.
Back after this.
And we're back.
Great to be with you, L. Rushbow and talent on lawn from God.
Great to be with you, my friends.
All right.
Mike Allen, Dana Milbank, Washington Post.
Sounds like they're throwing in a towel here.
Uh, don't, don't, don't believe this, folks.
This could be a setup.
Could be I just I read this stuff.
Uh-uh-uh-uh.
We haven't even gotten to hearings yet, and these people are throwing in a towel.
Something doesn't pass the smell test, but here are the details.
Democrats have decided that unless there is an unexpected development in the weeks ahead, they will not launch a major fight to block Supreme Court nomination of John G. Roberts Jr., according to legislators, Senate aides, and party strategists.
In a series of interviews in recent days, more than a dozen Democrats, maybe twelve for those of you in uh in Rio Linda, more than a dozen Democratic senators and aides who were intimately involved in the deliberations about strategy, said they see no evidence that most Democratic senators are prepared to expend political capital in what is widely seen as a futile effort to derail the nomination.
Although they expect to subject President Bush's nominee to tough questioning at confirmation hearings next month.
Members of the minority party said they don't plan to marshal any concerted campaign against Roberts because they've concluded he's likely to.
What do you mean don't plan to mark what do you think they've been doing?
It just hasn't panned out.
No one's planning all out warfare, said a Senate Democratic aide, closely involved in caucus strategy on Roberts.
These are liberals, and as such, I don't believe them.
Charles Schumer said there was going to be war.
And Charles Schumer wants to make a big name for himself, and he'll try whatever he has to at the hearings to do so.
Anyway, for now, the Democratic aid said that Democratic strategy is to make it clear that Roberts is subject to fair scrutiny while avoiding a pointless conflagration that could backfire on the party.
We're going to come out of this looking dignified, and we will show we took the constitutional process seriously.
That's a tantamount admission that they've been screwing it up up to now.
That's a tantamount admission that they're looking anything but constitutional and dignified.
This was a smart political choice in the White House, said one prominent Democrat lawmaker who demanded anonymity because they were departing from the Democrats' public position.
I don't know, I don't think people see a close vote here at all.
In a reflection of the mildness of the Democrats' message, a set of party talking points circulated last week.
The Senate orifices included no specific criticism of the nominee, but simply call for an honest look at John Roberts' record.
Anyway, there they think that uh he gets 70 votes.
Uh and 70 votes, that's too much.
They they that nobody the theory is they don't want to go out on a limb.
Uh, individual Democrats don't want to go out on a limb and be lone wolves if the Senate's gonna vote 70 or more for the guy.
The Democrats said that instead of mounting a headlong assault on Roberts, they plan to use the hearings and the surrounding attention by the news media to remind voters of their party's values, including the protection of rights for individual Americans.
That's abortion.
Uh The plan calls for emphasizing rights beyond abortion in an effort to appeal to a broader swath of the uh of the electorate.
Fine, that's what they say today.
I'll believe it when I see it, because I still see media reports.
Robert said a collision course with Maine's Olympia Snow.
Memo cited abortion as tragedy.
Roberts came out against Michael Jackson.
There's still a deluge of reports every day for the mainstream press on some of the outrageous things that Roberts has written when he was with the Reagan administration.
And when he was with uh the Solicitor General's office, so the media is still out there trying to carry the water for the Democrats, and they're still trying to gin up anti-robot sentiment out there, and don't for a moment think that they've given up on that, folks.
We'll be right back.
Stay with us.
That's exactly what we do.
We make the complex understandable, we do it happily, and we do it free of charge.
Each day here at the EIB Network.
I sometimes wonder if people actually understand what a great deal this program is.
The encyclopedia of knowledge and information that's imparted daily and then archived at uh at our August website.
Oh well, the media still trying to find that one thing that would disqualify John Roberts.
Let's go to Good Morning America.
Correspondent Jessica Yellen reporting on Roberts and the new papers released by the White House.
This is a montage of her report.
On the topic of school prayer, Roberts urged the president to support a constitutional.
Stop the tape.
Notice the breathlessness.
the urgency, the sense of, whoa, no, look at this discovery attitude in this report.
It allows silent prayer in public school.
He also urged the White House to oppose an effort by some in the women's movement to equalize pay between women and men who do comparable work.
Roberts also argued at the time that the Geneva Convention, which offers protections to most prisoners of war, should not apply to terrorists.
Perhaps the strangest of all the documents are two combative memos regarding the singer Michael Jackson.
Roberts recommends against writing a presidential letter praising the pop star.
All right, now as you listen to this, do you not detect an attitude?
Well, what is the attitude?
The attitude here is one of, and this does this word superiority does not quite capture what I mean.
But it's as close as I can come.
This this reporter could be any reporter in the mainstream press.
There is a presumption and assumption that what they believe is just automatically conventional wisdom.
And anything expressed by somebody else, any view or other views expressed by somebody else is God, can you believe this?
There is an undertone of God, can you believe this guy?
In this whole report.
For example, let me go through it here.
On the topic of school prayer, Roberts urged the president to support a constitutional amendment that would allow silent prayer in public school.
Do you believe that?
Who is this man?
Prayer in the schools?
He's an alien.
And it goes on.
He also urged the White House to oppose an effort by some in the women's movement to equalize pay between women and men who do comparable work.
I can't believe it.
This guy's a Neanderthal, is the attitude with this story.
And then Roberts also argued at the time that the Geneva Convention, which offers protections to most prisoners of war, should not apply to terrorists.
Do you believe that there are people who don't think terrorists should be given access to the Geneva Convention?
Who is this guy?
Is this not the attitude of this whole report?
Like, well, everybody knows that there shouldn't be school prayer.
Everybody knows that there ought to be federally mandated equal pay.
Everybody knows terrorists need to have protection of the Jeeva conventions.
Who is this guy?
That's the attitude.
And it's It's an attitude of condescension, of smug arrogance, condescension and superiority.
They think they've found dirt here.
They think they've really dug up the dirt.
So when I see these stories, the Democrats have decided that there's no way to defeat them.
Well, somebody better tell their buddies and allies in the media.
Because the media thinks they've dug up Bork kind of dirt here.
They think they've dug up Clarence Thomas Anita Hill kind of dirt here.
And then even this last item, perhaps the strangest of all the documents, are two combative memos regarding the singer Michael Jackson.
Why just weeks ago everybody in the media thought the guy was a pedophile.
Now ABC's Good Morning America thinks that John Roberts is odd for telling the president, don't get near this guy.
For crying out loud, folks.
The media doesn't want to get near this guy.
But now Roberts is supposed to have embraced him so Reagan could have embraced him because Roberts didn't.
My Michael Jackson, he wouldn't even write a letter of support for Michael Jackson.
Why who is this alien, John Roberts?
You don't get the details here.
You want some of the details on some of this stuff?
On the topic of school prayer, Roberts urged the president to support a constitutional amendment that would allow silent prayer.
The reason is that there was a movement in the country to deny prayer in the schools, and John Roberts looks at the Constitution, there's nothing in there that says you can't pray.
But there were there they're all relying on this separation of church and state, but that's not what separation church and state is.
Separation, church and state doesn't even exist in the Constitution in those words.
The Constitution doesn't even address separation of church and state.
That's a liberal concoction.
All it does is say there shall be no state sponsored and established religion.
But it doesn't say you can't pray in the school.
And yet there were some people out there saying that it says it does.
Roberts was saying the Constitution doesn't say that, Mr. President.
I urge, you know, a constitutional amendment on this.
He's a constitutionalist.
This business on equal pay for equal work.
Let me give you the details on this.
This is the Olympia Snow story.
Judge Roberts, who was 29 at the time, even suggested that the Congresswoman Ms. Snow, Representative Nancy Johnson of Connecticut, and Claudine Schneider of Rhode Island might be Marxists.
Well, he didn't use that word.
Here's what he wrote.
Their slogan may as well be from each according to his ability to each according to her gender, Roberts quipped.
So, Well, that is a tenet of Marxism with a little adjustment from each, according to his means, to each according to his needs.
Meaning you rob the rich and give it all away to the poor.
It's Marxism.
It's redistribution of income.
And this was a bill to sponsor federally mandated equal pay.
And that flies in the face of the free market.
Oh, and it was also about it was about comparable worth.
Yeah, this was the comparable worth bill that was going to say that a ditch digger's job was the same thing as a homemaker's, and if the ditch digger made 50 bucks an hour, so does the homemaker.
They came up with all these comparable worth.
And it was left up to some American government tribunal to define what work was comparable and then set the pay grades for it.
It's not how this works.
That is Marxism.
But if you listen to the ABC report, how could anybody oppose equal pay?
Because the people reporting on this are so uninformed about the actual issues behind all this that they think Roberts is the oddball.
He is head and shoulders ten times above them intellectually, and they demonstrate it by their lack of understanding and lack of curiosity to even understand why he's saying these things.
To them, these are all cliches.
These are just things that are quite understood.
There shouldn't be prayer in school.
Who possibly think it's like the movie critic uh uh Claudine uh what was her name or Pauline Cale in New York after Nixon won in 72.
I'm stunned.
Nixon won?
Why, none of my friends voted for him.
Well, her universe was her friends, and since none of her friends voted for Nixon, she thought her universe was America.
Well, that's the same thing these people in the media are thinking.
And who's their universe?
Other reporters and other liberals.
And Charlie Gibson, next up on Good Morning America, he was breathless.
He said, he said, Jessica, Jessica, did you find anything about abortion?
Jessica, is there anything about abortion?
Jessica A lot of people obviously very concerned about Robert's thoughts regarding the issue of abortion.
Anything in those documents that give you indication of doubt what he does feel about that.
There is one indication uh as to how he might feel.
He describes abortion at one point as a tragedy.
But administration officials point out that Roberts was simply reflecting the position of the president at the time.
And that's why I'm here.
How did he feel?
Not what does he think?
How did he Charlie Gibbs?
How does he how does he feel about abortion?
Well, he thinks it's a tragedy.
What?
He thinks he thinks the celebration of our liberalism is a tragedy.
Abortion is a celebration.
Abortion is emancipation.
Abortion is what send us free, and this guy thinks it's a tragedy.
Who are we nominating it?
This is the attitude, folks, that that underscores all these reports.
You know, some of you people, and I don't mind referencing this, you call and tell me sometimes I'm out of touch.
You know who's out of touch?
All of these self-anointed, smarter than everybody else in a room, liberal media people think they are the smartest people in the room, that they are the most in touch.
Like trying, well, many Americans haven't a clue.
They literally haven't a clue.
For Olympia Snow, by the way, Ms. Snow, this is the New York Sun.
Ms. Snow reacted cautiously yesterday to the news that Judge Roberts summarily dismissed her stance in the pay equity and uh comparable worth debate.
She said, I understand the 1984 memo authored by John Roberts, one of 5,000 documents released by the administration today, demonstrates that he and I had a difference of opinion on how to legally approach the matter, evaluing women's contributions in the workforce.
Hopefully, 21 years later, Judge Roberts possesses an openness with respect to the issues of gender-based wage discrimination, she said, adding that she considers the issue critical.
She's not mad, but she hopes that he has evolved.
There.
I'm in the mood for some Zell Miller.
Shall we have some Zell Miller?
Zell Miller in Nashville on Sunday.
Gave a speech.
Here's a portion of his remarks on activist judges.
Using psychobabble and the latest foreign feds.
It has removed prayer and the Bible from schools.
Each Christmas it kidnaps the baby Jesus, Halo, Manger, and all from the city square.
It has legalized the barbaric killing of unborn babies.
And is ready to discard like an outdated hula hoop, the universal institution of marriage between a man and a woman.
And they think that they're the ones who are in contact with the mainstream of this country.
They're the people who look at the biggest box office smash in recent history.
As Mel Gibson's the passion, and think, oh my God, there are more kooks in this country than we knew.
Not realizing they are the kooks.
Not realizing they are the minority.
Remember old Zell at the Republican convention, John Kerry said he's going to be tough on the terrorists.
Well, what's he gonna shoot at him?
Spitballs?
He wants to get rid of all of our weapons.
Back after this, folks.
All right, just a little bit here on the uh the Iraqi constitution.
You know, I have to sit here and laugh.
The media, the Democrats, the liberals breathlessly excited over the failure of the Iraqis to meet their deadline to come up with a constitution.
We knew this wouldn't work.
We knew the elections wouldn't come off on time.
We knew sovereignty wouldn't come off on time.
We can't do this, and these clowns, they can't come with a constitution.
Bush is trying to force a constitution on them and they didn't come up with it.
We are so happy.
Hey.
You know what's happening in Iraq, folks?
The democratic process well underway.
They voted.
They actually voted.
How long does it take us to come up with a boondoggle highway bill that overspends by gazillions of dollars.
How many votes are there before that thing's put to bed?
How long does it take to come up with a budget every year here?
These people are putting together their constitution.
I'll tell you the one thing they don't have, they don't have a George Soros over there running any ads against any of the factions.
They don't have anybody out there trying to sabotage or kill anybody else in the constitutional meetings.
They just didn't meet the deadline, but they're gonna come up with a vote and they're working on it.
And I'll bet you they come up with one.
It is important, there's no question, but it hasn't failed.
You know what?
We better capture bin Laden by Friday at some down.
The war on terror is over.
It's a failure.
This is silly to put these kind of limits on it.
But once again, we have this excitement, this happiness on the left at this supposed failure.
Three quick sound bites.
First from Condoleezza Rice.
I think the Iraqis have uh a lot to be proud of.
They've got a lot of work to do.
But um this is really democracy at work in Iraq.
And uh given where they were just a few years ago, um, having lived in tyranny for all those decades, uh, this is an extraordinary achievement for the Iraqi people.
I have a uh couple bites here from Zalme Khalizad.
Uh he's the new ambassador to Iraq.
He was the ambassador of Afghanistan when I was there in February.
And tell you a little story.
I was in his office uh have having a meeting with him, and his wife called uh from Washington and uh said, Do you know that you're the new ambassador to Iraq?
He said, What?
So uh he we we left the room when he talked to her, called us back, he said they did my wife on the phone just told me I'm the new ambassador to Iraq.
It was in the Washington Post.
So uh we went, I was with Mary Mattel.
We went out to his secretary's office of a computer was and we we looked at the Washington Post, and it was an Al Cayman's column, and he was going to be named the new ambassador to Iraq, and he hadn't even been told.
But yet there he is.
He's he's he's an Afghan uh uh or an he's an Afghan, sorry, but he's he's uh very impressive man.
I liked him a lot.
Uh and he is the new ambassador uh in Iraq.
He was on Fox and Friends today.
Edie Hill said, Do the committee members of this constitution business understand what the reaction will be in the U.S. if they adopt Sharia law as the in the land?
Well, they will not adopt uh Sharia as the law of the land.
Uh the that issue has been resolved.
Uh, there is no dispute about that.
So women will have equal rights.
Iraqis.
Women will have equal rights.
That issue has been resolved.
Hear that, Howard Dean.
Yeah, the women's rights issue, that that was okay, the role of Islam in the lives of women.
That was one of the stumbling blocks.
And uh Zalme uh Khalizad says, eh, solved.
The next question was, okay.
I was unaware of that, because all the reports that we had gotten was that that was still something had to be worked out.
But you say it's been done.
All right.
What about the status of Shiite clerics?
There was there was another thing that people had said that was not worked out.
That the Shiites wanted a special status for clerics.
What does that mean?
And is that issue still on the table?
As of now, that issue has also been resolved.
Uh there will be no uh reference to a special status uh for the Shia clerics or for uh any other clerics.
Um it was part of the discussion.
It did exist in one of the earlier drafts, but as of now, the other uh uh issue has been resolved as well.
Wow, we didn't know that.
Why why that hasn't been reported?
We didn't know that.
Yeah, I know.
We'll be back here in just a second.
Stay with us.
All right, I want to squeeze uh another phone call in here before we have split the scene today.
This is uh Cora in Durham, North Carolina.
Glad you called, Cora.
Welcome to the program.
Thanks so much, Rush.
Um, you made a statement a few minutes ago about there being an ongoing spread measuring it being called equality, and I was just done at what an excellent uh definition for socialism.
Yeah, spreading misery equally.
Yeah, I it it that was just stunning.
I had to pull over and write it down because I'm gonna go put it on my email tagline.
That was uh I uh I'm glad it registered with you.
It's one of the many profundities that are uttered regularly uh by me on on this program, but it's true.
Don't you think that's do you do you when you run into liberals, do you see them happy?
No, and I I'll tell you one of the reasons why is because they build all of their agendas on guilt, not on grace.
Uh on on guilt, not on what?
Not on grace.
Grace.
Oh, Grace, grace, grace.
Not on grace.
Um, they you know, the whole abortion is agenda.
People want other people to have abortions because uh I really think because they feel so bad about themselves, they want everybody else to feel bad.
Yeah, I well you're on your own on that one.
I I've the you know the the I've never understood the um excitement and desire for all the abortions possible to take place that that some in the far left really have.
That's that's beyond my pay grade, and pay grade's pretty high, and it it's hard to explain that one.
But on the other hand, I just I just think for whatever reason they're miserable people, uh and their happiness uh is derived when others are made miserable as well, i.e.
spreading equality by making everybody equally miserable.
▲
Export Selection