All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 12, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:37
September 12, 2005, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
I really don't know if I can take this.
I got to take, you know, this is the first, when was the last Senate confirmation hearing we had of a Supreme Court justice?
Wasn't it Ruth Buzzy?
Ruth Buzzy?
Yeah, it's 11 years ago.
Maybe long.
Ruth Buzzy Ginsburg or something.
And of course, that was a piece of cake.
The Roberts hearings are underway here, folks, is basically the point here.
The Roberts hearings are underway, and the bloviating and the blowhards will be dominating the day today.
It'll just be opening statements.
You'll get Specters doing his opening statement, and Roberts will get his, and all the members of the committee that want to have their opening statements.
There really won't be a whole lot of fireworks today unless there are some fireworks in the opening statements.
I wouldn't be surprised if there are.
We're going to be monitoring this during the course of the program.
And if anything of note happens today, we will, of course, pass it on to you and comment accordingly.
At any rate, there'll be ample opportunity during the course of the week to see how this goes out.
Greetings and welcome.
Rush Limbaugh here back for another full week of Broadcast Excellence on the EIB Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, is 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
All right, we got a lot of conventional wisdom out there on the Roberts hearings today.
Well, he's pretty much going to sail through there.
And since this is now for the Rehnquist seat, the Democrats are basically going to mount a big show.
But the purpose of the big show they mount will not be to stop Roberts, but rather to set the stage of opposition for the next nominee.
By the way, the whispering and the buzz is on Priscilla Owen right now.
This is just the conventional wisdom.
I'm making no predictions.
I'm just passing along.
What I've heard, and apparently had a private meeting with Priscilla Owen last week for essentially the O'Connor seat, since this is now the Rehnquist seat that is being argued about today.
Judge Roberts, having been named the Supreme Court's Chief Justice or nominated by President Bush, Ron Brownstein today in the L.A. Times, you see this?
Ron Brownstein, it's so partisan up there in the Senate these days.
It's so partisan out there in the country that actually what Bush ought to do is just nominate a Democrat for the court, like Joe Lieberman.
But if not Joe Lieberman, no, I'm not kidding.
When I saw it, I thought, okay, somebody has doctored the L.A. Times today on the internet, and this is a parody piece.
But no, Mr. Brownstein is actually serious about this.
It just makes me laugh.
I mean, the idea that Bush could gain anything by reaching out again across the aisle to a bunch of Democrats is just, I don't know.
It's just laughable to me.
At any rate, Chuck Schumer yesterday rehearsed.
Chuck Schumer rehearsed his performance.
He actually had mock hearings in his office.
He brought somebody in, a professor from Harvard Law, to portray John Roberts.
I wonder if they even set up fake cameras in theirs.
I'm sure he had the makeup on and everything.
I'm sure that this is it for Schumer.
I mean, he's heading up the Democrat Senatorial Campaign Committee.
It's his job to get more Democrats elected to the Senate, find more nominees out there.
And it's his job to, I think he's self-appointed himself to be the resistance here to Judge Roberts.
And he says he's going to ask for as many rounds as he needs to ask all of his questions.
He's going to ask specific questions.
He's going to ask, and Ted Kennedy has talked about how he's going to ask Judge Roberts about civil rights as it's been on display down in New Orleans and Hurricane Katrina.
People read this stuff, and I'm, you know, I understand people get upset.
I can't believe they're going to do that.
Folks, you have to understand what's on display here.
And I want to spend some time one more day talking about this, the whole political aftermath of the Hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans.
Because I think there's a huge media scandal brewing here.
I use the term loosely, and I referred to this on Friday.
I think what's happened here has almost been scandalous in terms of the reporting of the aftermath of this hurricane.
But you have to understand that for all the complaining and all the whining, that's all the Democrats are doing.
They're not offering anything.
I refuse to believe they're making any impressions favorably on the people.
They may be succeeding in drumming up negatives for President Bush.
You know what the big problem is?
I still don't think it's the Democrats.
Democrats are who they are, and they're a known quantity, and they're going to behave in very predictable ways.
What continues to bother me is these Republicans in Washington.
We've got John Fund has a great piece today, OprinionJournal.com, and he says, you know, FDR and Truman both cut federal spending when they had to deal with their own crises and disasters that required a lot of massive spending.
But the president who didn't do that was LBJ.
LBJ gave us this expansionist notion, guns and butter, chicken and every whatever it was, pot.
That wasn't LBJ, but there were no cuts at all.
And of course, look where it got us.
And now the New York Times is doing stories about, you know, this is a big coming debate for conservatives why conservatives here have been suggesting a limited government as the way to go.
And I don't think this is a very good examination of, well, Robin Toner wrote the story.
There's no limited government here.
Conservatives haven't yet succeeded in reducing the size of government.
And if anything's on display here, it is how big bureaucratic government is sort of an albatross.
But that really gets to the larger point.
And that is, has this been that bad on the federal level?
I mean, the big smokescreen here is being blown around the local officials and the federal officials.
You have already had one guy act as the fall guy, but take the fall for President Bush, and that's Mike Brown.
But you've got these Republicans.
Mel Martinez is now talking, the new senator from Florida is now talking about not making tax cuts permanent in order to pay for that.
Well, we might as well have elected a Democrat if he's going to run around saying things like this.
So many Republicans are out on their own.
And part of this is because the president has not enforced party discipline on his own people in Congress.
The new tone, or I don't know what it is, but he just has not enforced much party discipline.
Here's another thing.
We've got a conservative, and I'm not going to make the mistake this time.
We have a conservative who is going to oppose Lincoln Chafee in Rhode Island.
And the White House is out trying to kill this guy.
The White House out there trying to say, no, Chafee's our guy.
We need the numbers in the Senate.
We can't nominate some guy that's going to lose the election in Rhode Island.
We don't know that he's going to lose.
I'm going to have to find out more about this guy.
I'll get you his name as the program unfolds.
But, you know, the idea that conservatives have taken over the government and that the government has gotten smaller and the conservatives have something to prove or have something to answer for in this hurricane aftermath is absolute total BS.
The government has grown and grown and grown.
There aren't any budget cuts.
Nothing's gotten smaller.
We've added bureaucracy layers upon other layers.
It's silly.
The real question ought to be this.
All the big government types ought to be asking, you know, are the people here that were not well served by government going to be as supportive of government in the future.
We're already getting stories, too, about Mary Landrews' base fleeing from New Orleans and not returning and not going home.
We led the discussion on this on Thursday and Friday.
I know we'll get to Landra in a minute.
She's out of control.
She said something yesterday on Fox News Sunday that, and I have the audio of it here, just amazing.
It's flat out, unbelievably humorous and amazing.
But we've got a lot to do here today, folks, is the point.
I'm just trying to give you a little overview of what's on the schedule today as we keep our eyes on the Roberts confirmation hearings open day.
Let me open it.
We have a quick timeout here, and we'll be back and continue with all the rest of the program right after this.
Documented to me almost always right 98.5% of the time, according to the latest opinion audit from the prestigious Sullivan Group in Sacramento, California, Rush Limbaugh.
Serving humanity simply by showing up.
Telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
The email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
All right.
People say, Rush, what do they mean, media scandal?
And let me put scandal in quotes.
But the simplest way, I think, to clue you in as to my thinking is to give you the well, before I get, how many people did you expect after two weeks of news coverage to be in body bags?
10,000 to 20,000, right?
We had 25,000 body bags and a death toll of constantly predicted at 10,000.
The mayor down there, thousands upon thousands.
The figure grew and grew until finally someone put a number to it.
10,000 was the number I saw most frequently.
And of course, that figure was constantly bandied about as graphics on television screens over the destruction of New Orleans or shots of poor people in New Orleans trying to leave.
And of course, the impression, we're a nation of pictures, the impression was left that some of these people we're looking at are not going to make it.
They're going to die because nobody's getting there soon enough because nobody cares about them.
Why?
Because they're black.
And of course, the local government and the local and the state government in Louisiana, of course, always exempted from any criticism or concern here because it was a fast route to George W. Bush, who as a Republican automatically is a racist.
And so we were expecting huge numbers.
And it was so bad, but the federal government wasn't concerned.
They didn't get down there soon enough afterwards.
They didn't try to get people out.
You know the drill.
Here is the death toll as of this morning.
197 dead in Louisiana.
211 dead in Mississippi, where you still have a tough time finding a news camera.
Seven people dead in Florida.
So the death toll now is a little more than 400.
And don't misunderstand.
I am not suggesting that that's acceptable or okay.
I'm simply saying it ain't 10,000.
It isn't 25,000 body bags.
It's not total destruction.
It doesn't even rank, as we speak today, in the top 10 deadliest natural disasters in the country.
Not even close.
Economically is a different thing because of the wide area which was hit by the hurricane.
But in terms of the human toll, it appears it's not even going to show up in the top 10.
So has all of the caterwalling and all of the hysteria and all of the predictions, has it been in proportion with reality?
No, it hasn't.
There's been a little hope.
The Democrats, as someone said last week, were dancing on the graves of the dead in New Orleans.
They were celebrating.
They were happy.
Why?
Because they think they finally have their issue that's going to destroy George W. Bush.
And no doubt they think they have destroyed George W. Bush as they look at the current polling numbers.
It got to the point where we were even told to excuse looters.
Well, it would be simplistic.
It would be simplistic to say that the looting was simply going on by poor people in New Orleans.
And no, it's not simplistic at all to say anything of the sort.
You see, we live in a society here which features, I have been amazed.
I was telling someone yesterday, I'm amazed at the self-loathing I see on the left.
An example of self-loathing to me is to say that it is simplistic to say that the looters are all of one race or that the looters are mostly one race or that the looters are even bad.
It's simplistic.
Why is it simplistic?
Well, because we have to understand why they're, oh, we have to dig deep to the root causes then.
Well, what are the root causes?
Well, the primary root cause is the inequality of America.
You see, most of these, the hate America crowd first is so much socialists, and they look at socialism as well-intentioned.
Socialism is an equal opportunity promise.
It's an equal opportunity opportunity, if you will.
Capitalism, of course, is by definition unfair.
You have the haves and you have the have-nots.
You have the successful and the unsuccessful and the less successful and the not as successful.
And that's just not right.
And so since America is capitalist, it is inherently unfair.
And therefore, we can't blame any of the people who are not in the upper echelons of capitalism because it is the American system which has doomed them there or condemned them there.
Ergo, the self-loathing of America.
Now, never mind that the experiment of socialism results in failure after failure after failure.
Never mind that the experiments of socialism result in dictators who take power by coups, who then rule by murder and plunder.
Never mind that that's the reality of the situation.
No, it's that, well, we just haven't given it the best shot.
And even so, there are still people trying.
How else do you explain?
How else is it excused that Castro has a wonderful island nation?
Everybody there has health care.
He's trying.
He's trying to make everybody equal so that nobody has anything more than anybody else.
And so when we see these pictures from New Orleans, the Blame America first crowd, the hate America crowd, the self-loathers, simply see their predictions having come true.
America is evil because America is unjust because capitalism assigns winners and losers.
Dick Gephardt, the winners of life's lottery.
And so if the American system of capitalism has consigned you to loser status when the controls are off and you have a chance to get that television set that they're denying you in America, or you have a chance to get whatever you want from that store where there aren't any cops anymore, then you're entitled.
It's understandable.
You'd be too simplistic to suggest that they're maybe committing crimes.
Too simplistic.
We must understand, and that's the thinking.
It's the, I think it's the, well, there are other examples of this.
Give you one.
Throughout the news stack today, I have stories, the rich are returning to their homes in New Orleans.
Rich returning to their homes in New Orleans.
Subhead, poor with nowhere to go.
Then there's another story.
Rich protect their homes and businesses with hired security.
As if there's something wrong with this.
We have looting that has gone on.
We have a police force in large number that abandon the city.
We have anarchy.
And so the rich, the successful, the middle class, whoever you want to, whatever you call them, don't believe that rich here means multi-millionaires.
This is just the upper middle class, the successful people.
And by the way, it's not stated, but one of the things understood, whites, rich white people move back to their homes.
Rich white people hiring security guards.
Poor black people can't.
Blah, blah, blah.
Same kind of self-loathing that you get in these stories, as though there is something wrong, unfair, unjust about somebody wanting to protect their property after having witnessed what's gone on there the last two weeks.
What kind of an idiot would not want to protect their property?
What kind of responsibility to your family would it be to just sit there and let your property be subject to vandalism and crime and what have you?
But no, no, no, no.
Russia's not fair that they have the ability to do that.
Everybody should have their goods and their possessions open so anybody can take them in a circumstance.
I guess goes the thinking.
It's just not fair.
It's just not right.
And in the midst of all this, Mary Landrew shows up on television yesterday.
I don't even want to paraphrase this, folks.
In fact, I don't even want to read the quote.
I want you to hear the quote yourself.
I want you to hear what she said to Chris Wallace as her explanation for why the mayor and a governor did not handle this well on a local issue side of things.
That coming up after our bottom-of-the-hour obscene profit break here at the EIB network, we'll be back.
We'll continue in mere moments.
Yes, I heard Leahy.
I don't care what Leahy has to say ever.
Don't even bother me with it.
Already having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have El Rushbo on the cutting edge of societal evolution.
I snuck a glance here, folks, at the confirmation hearings, the opening statements.
Senator Kennedy, now, they schedule these at noon, by the way, so that Senator Kennedy would be able to have a cocktail before lunch.
Lunch will be after the hearings.
If I'm looking at Judge Roberts here, they cut back and forth to the senator who's speaking, and they've got a split screen.
And Roberts has obviously gone to acting school to learn how to look serious and interested in what these blowhards have to say.
I had to laugh.
What's his face?
Leahy, who said he was going to spend August under his apple tree up in Vermont reading up on John Roberts, said these hearings are the only time that we the people get to find out what you're going to do, what evil plans you have, what ways you're going to turn this country away from liberal socialism that we have started it down that path.
And, you know, Roberts just sits there and looks very interested.
You can just tell, folks, it would be like if I were there.
You could just tell that this guy is the smartest guy in the room.
You know, this guy's IQ is higher than all the others on this committee, Republican and Democrat combined.
And he's sitting here and he's just suffering a bunch of blowhard fools because this is what you have to do.
This is the route.
I actually had a dream.
I wasn't going to tell you this.
I had a dream that I had to appear before Congress in some sort of hearing like this and that the country came to a screeching halt.
They declared it a national holiday to watch it.
I wouldn't call this a self-absorbed dream.
It was one of these things that'll never happen.
Knock on granite.
All right, Mary Landrew, I have teased you long enough.
And by the way, I'm getting a lot of, I wouldn't say grief, but people say, Rush, are you okay?
Because last week I said, you know, I like Mary Landrew now.
She's a swing vote in the Senate.
She's not, you know, she's not one of these petal-of-the-metal libs that doesn't move off of it now and then.
And I said, someday she actually looks cute to me.
Nice-looking woman, still has some of her baby fat, in fact.
And people have been questioning my judgment ever since.
And so even Cookie here on the Q Sheet roster, Mary Cute Baby Fat Landrew, you know, with a little smirk here towards me.
Well, anyway, here's what happened.
Folks, I just want you to imagine if a Republican governor, if there were a Republican governor or senator, white, talking about black employees in a city and saying what Mary Landrew says here in this bite, I want you to know if he'd have gotten away with it.
Here's the question, Chris Wallace.
Senator Landry, I want to ask you, and I'm going to ask you both.
Some other senator was on there too.
About the local response.
Was it incompetent and insulting for Mayor Ray Nagan to order a mandatory evacuation, but then to leave buses?
And we got a picture of these buses, hundreds of buses, idle so that they could be flooded instead of using them to get people out.
I was there, as you know, through the whole ordeal with state and local officials and was right there with Louisiana, Democrats and Republicans, city council members, police chiefs, mayors, the governors, and could watch what Haley Barber was doing and Governor Riley in Alabama.
I am not going to level criticism at the local level.
These people are going to be able to do that.
But I'd like to get there if you could.
This one specifically.
I will ask you.
I will answer it.
I am not going to level criticism at local and state officials.
Mayor Nagan and most mayors in this country have a hard time getting their people to work on a sunny day, let alone getting them out of the city in front of a hurricane.
All right.
All right, folks.
It's flat out amazing.
Mayor Nagan and most mayors in this country have a hard time getting their people to work on a sunny day, let alone getting them out of the city in front of a hurricane.
What?
We simply can't expect certain big cities to work well because their employees won't show up.
And it's unfair to hold them accountable because most mayors can't get their employees to work anyway.
Isn't that what's called the soft bigotry of low expectations?
Could it be said, ladies and gentlemen, that Mary Landrew is making this argument because New Orleans has a high percentage of African Americans in it who might make up quite a number of these employees that Mayor Nagan can't get to show up?
I hope not, folks.
I certainly hope not.
But I mean, it certainly sounds that way.
This is the way the left has conditioned me to think.
The left has conditioned me to think in terms of skin color and skin gender and, well, not skin gender.
Well, it could be skin gender in San Francisco.
Any number of, well, that's, I'm simply referring to the addedictomy procedure here that's paid for by taxpayers out there.
But, I mean, this is she won't get, she won't go where the criticism needs to be.
She won't go local.
The reason she won't, here's the question I have.
The question I have for both Mary Landrew and Governor Blanco.
Who are their controllers?
Who's running them?
Is it Howard Dean?
Is it Harry Reid?
Which member of the Democratic Party apparatus is coordinating all this so that there's not a deviation from the plan to keep all the focus on Bush and FEMA and other places.
As I say, we're going to nuke this whole notion today.
I'm sure you've heard about this great piece in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette by a guy named Jack Kelly.
The federal response to Katrina was not as portrayed.
And folks, I have to tell you this, too.
There was an absolutely fabulous story in the Palm Beach Post yesterday.
It was by Derek Cam and Alan Gomez.
And lack of plan hurt.
Katrina hit states response is the headline.
But you know what this story does?
This story talks to Florida, local, Florida, you know, state and local officials on how they have offered or how they have dealt with hurricanes.
Mentions not a word about the feds.
Doesn't say a word.
It talks about the plans that they have here in Florida, how often they meet to take the tests and temperatures of the plans and then to do dry runs.
It even mentions that some of these Florida executives and planners called Louisiana and Mississippi when they learned Katrina was going to miss the Florida panhandle and offered their services and both states turned them down.
But it's a fascinating story.
It appeared yesterday in the Palm Beach Post and it really explains how all of this preparedness is a local and state responsibility, that it is not a federal responsibility.
And it's so I don't think Mr. Snerdley wants to know what am I doing reading the Palm Beach Post.
All right, I must fess up.
I wasn't.
It was recommended to me.
Snerdley's in there wiping his brow.
No, I wasn't.
It was recommended to me by someone who read it.
So I remembered late yesterday afternoon between football games to go check the website, and there it was.
Trish in Alberta, Canada.
I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi.
Good morning, Rush.
Hi.
Hi.
I was listening to this whole thing on Fox News yesterday as well.
And what struck me, it was incredible to hear Mary Landrieu blame the Bush administration for not spending their surplus to help refurbish these levies.
Clinton could not do it.
He had to cut back on the funds because he was dealing with a deficit left over by the Reagan administration.
And then she added the first Bush administration.
And I'm sitting there thinking, my God, a year ago, all we were hearing from these Democrats was that it was the worst economy since Herbert Hoover.
Now, where did Bush's surplus come from?
Where did it magically appear from?
Yeah, well, I know there isn't one.
Exactly.
And there wasn't a one.
There isn't one.
The actual, and I've got some more Mary Landrie soundbites coming on, but this is the reason why I asked the question about who's controlling her and who's, you know, who's running Catherine Blanco, Kathleen Blanco.
I mean, it's clear that left on their own, folks, they're going to step in it.
You put a bag of cow manure out there, and most of these people are going to step in it.
And somebody's going to be guiding them away from the cow manure.
And yesterday, somebody was unable to keep Mary Landrieu out of the calmure.
She just, I mean, she literally just stepped right in it here.
Well, the mayor can't get his, most mayors can't get their people to work on a sunny day.
Yeah, like everybody, this is understood.
Is that the way we look at bureaucrats and their employees?
They just, you think the mayor's supposed to be able to do something?
Come on, everybody knows that the people aren't going to go to work.
What is that?
The soft bigotry of low expectations?
Are local civil service jobs simply patronage jobs, just give them a paycheck, and whether they show to work or not is no big deal?
It's amazing.
You look, I know, used to call it shiftless and lazy, but now, see, we can't call it shiftless and lazy because that would be simplistic.
We have to understand why they are shiftless and lazy and who wouldn't be when they see all these people making so much money at Enron and Halliburton.
What is the point of going to work if you can't get anywhere near a decent wage when there are Enrons and WorldComs and Halliburtons and Cheneys and Bushes out there?
So you have to, they have no hope, Rush.
Why should they go to work?
It's not going to lead them anywhere.
The anthem of the self-loathers.
You always have to understand root causes.
You can never blame victims.
You can never blame the poor.
You can't, nobody is ever responsible for what happens to them.
Even those that didn't get out of New Orleans, it's not their, even those that could and didn't, it's not their fault.
It's not their fault.
You have to understand the root causes.
And it all boils down to what the Hate America crowd sees as basic unfairness and inequality in the way the country is designed, in the way the country is put together.
A quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue.
Folks, we've only just started.
I barely put my foot on the gas pedal.
Hang on, back in just a second.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
Yeah, I'm watching the confirmation hearings on the monitors here.
And the networks are covering this like an election.
It's almost like it's election night.
They ought to just go ahead and put the projection up there.
We project which network will first call it?
Roberts wins confirmation.
I want to see which network calls it first.
I mean, the way they're covering this is just why I get so bothered by all this anyway.
It's nothing new.
Anyway, here's the soundbite from the woman that called from Alberta, Canada, Trish.
We have the soundbite she was referring to from Mary Landria yesterday on Fox News Sunday.
The host Chris Wallace with Mary Landruin says, basically, look, is it just the president who gambled and lost?
Or frankly, did a lot of Louisiana politicians, including you?
The president gambled and lost, and I'll tell you why if you'll let me answer this question.
Number one, it is true that the president gave slightly more than Bill Clinton.
But what is also true is Bill Clinton was running the largest deficit created by the Reagan administration before him and the Bush administration before him.
President Bush was running a surplus, yet when he had a surplus, he didn't invest it in levies and flood protection for people from Miami to Orlando to New Orleans to Biloxi or to Mobile.
This is sad.
This is what Trish was talking about, but it's just patent is sad that somebody with this limited amount of understanding and knowledge is actually in the U.S. Senate.
The 90s were the greatest decade for economic activity in recent years, I thought.
When was the peace dividend and all the surplus?
That came after the Soviet Union and the wall fell and the Clinton administration got rid of all those big deficits.
This surplus that she's talking about, there never was a surplus.
It was 10-year economic forecasts.
But anybody with half a brain can tell you, folks, that two things are going to happen when a government report says there's a huge surplus in the out years.
A, government is going to suggest raising taxes, not cutting them, and B, they're going to spend it.
And this is precisely what happened.
There never was a surplus.
This is a Democrat mantra talking point about how the Bush administration squandered this giant surplus left by the Clinton administration.
But deficits only stop Democrats from spending when they are Republican deficits.
But the point is she didn't answer the question.
And see, this is, and Rob, hey, Wallace tried.
You've got to give him credit.
But it was clear more money was spent on the levies, more money was given to the Corps of Engineers during the five years of the Bush administration to date than were sent during an equivalent period of time during the Clinton presidency.
And, you know, she's out there fudging the numbers on the levee project.
She cooked the books.
Remember, they had a report that said the cost-benefit analysis to fixing the levies would not make it sensible to do.
And she went back and she told the Corps to basically cook the books, to do some recalculations to show that it would in order to get the money.
The question is, where did the money go?
It went to the core, but it didn't go to these levy projects, which everybody has been warning about for five or ten years.
And the idea that it can now fashionably be blamed on Bush, folks, it's as specious.
And that's why I say this is a modern media scandal, from the death toll to the hysteria to the willing attempt to join forces with the left to blame this on Bush.
It's just the new Cindy Sheehan.
It's all it's ever been.
And it was camouflaged and disguised with all the pictures of sadness and horror that we saw there.
So when you couple the projections of the thousands and thousands and thousands of dead with the pictures and Republicans unwilling to stand up to it, it gave this whole scandal a legitimacy that it apparently doesn't, well, scandal, gave a legitimacy it doesn't deserve.
Anyway, I got to take a quick break.
I'm up against it here on time again.
We'll be back and continue in Mere Moments on the EIB network.
Stay with us.
Get this.
Former CNN Crossfire co-host Michael Kinsley in the LA Times yesterday says that he's been told by a friend that CNN was encouraging guests to get angry last week from New Orleans and encouraging hosts to get angry last week.
It was in the L.A. Times that Kinsley wrote this yesterday.
Actually, Oprah's been doing this for years.
I don't understand what the big news is.
We'll be back in just a second with details.
▲
Export Selection