All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 6, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:44
October 6, 2005, Thursday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This Louis Free book looks pretty interesting.
I've gotten a little more data on this book.
Greetings, my friends.
Great to have you.
We're back the third and final hour today.
Broadcast Excellence on the Rush Limbaugh Program, 800-282-2882.
If you'd like to be on the program, email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
Okay.
Louis Free has a new book.
He's the former FBI director, and the pull quotes of the book so far, the highlights, Clinton was a problem because his closets were full of skeletons.
The problem was with Bill Clinton.
The scandals, I don't know how, I don't know if former FBI director Free has a terminal disease and how long he has left to live why I would put this out now.
But I'm sure he'll avoid Fort Marcy Park.
No, seriously, here's what the book says.
The problem was with Bill Clinton.
The scandals and the rumored scandals, the incubating scandals, the dying ones never ended.
Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction.
His closets were full of skeletons just waiting to burst out.
In another passage, Free says that the former president let down the American people and the families of victims of the Kobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia.
After promising to bring to justice those responsible for the bombing that killed 19 and injured hundreds, Louis Free says in his book that Clinton refused to personally ask the Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to allow the FBI to question bombing suspects that the kingdom had in custody.
That'd be the only way the Bureau could secure the interviews, according to Free.
He also writes in the book, quote, Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the Crown Prince that he understood the Saudis' reluctance to cooperate.
Then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton presidential library.
Free says that is a fact I am reporting.
Bill Clinton raised the subject of allowing the FBI in to question the bomb suspects, not really wanting to get that done, only raising the subject to tell the Crown Prince he understood their reluctance to cooperate.
And then he asked the Crown Prince for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library.
That's a fact I'm reporting, he says.
Free also says, and get this, in this new book, and these things are leaking from it today, Louis Free says that he was determined to stay on as FBI director until President Clinton left office so that Clinton could not appoint his successor.
I was concerned about who he would put in there as FBI director because he had expressed antipathy for the FBI and for the director.
Now, I don't know how clear your memories are, but back during that year, we always, I did, and a number of us really wondered about this relationship.
And Free was he had a lot dumped on him during the Clinton years, if you'll recall.
A lot of problems are blamed on Louis Free.
And he just sat in there and took it.
So Drudge, let's see.
Yep, Drudge has some of this up now, too, at his website, thedrudgreport.com.
So this is, as they say, developing in the Drudge world.
I'm not sure who the publisher of the book is, Mr. Snerdley, but I'll find that out.
That won't be hard to find out.
We'll get the publisher.
But these are just leaks from it.
Now, obviously, they're timed and they're planned leaks.
I mean, these are publicity leaks.
But nevertheless, that's what Louis Free is saying.
Now, it'll be interesting to watch this now just to see what kind of coverage this gets, if there's breathless reporting of the leaks from Louis Free's book, or if because Drudge has it first, they will ignore it.
Or, yeah, that's probably the more likely possibility Louis Free will get trashed.
Probably as early tomorrow, we'll see profiles on what it was really like of the FBI.
We'll have all kinds of FBI sources telling you, oh, this was a demented megalomaniac in there, Louis Free.
He was upset.
You know, Clinton had to rein this guy in.
No wonder he's upset.
Hey, we'll get stuff like this.
That'll be what will happen.
The mainstream press will circle the wagons for Bill Clinton.
And by the end of the week, Louis Free will be no different than any of the top 10 most wanted that the FBI was trying to catch during his tenure.
In fact, his mugshot will be in the post office by Saturday, Louis Free as Will.
After first appearing on the cable news channels.
All right, I want to talk more about this out-of-control hack prosecutor down in Travis County, Texas, Ronnie Earle.
Delay attorney, this is from the Houston Chronicle by R.G. Ratcliffe and Clay Robinson.
Delay attorney accuses Earl of jury shopping.
After one panel refused to indict him on charges of money laundering, another one did.
This is the story that there was a grand jury that refused to indict Delay based on the evidence that Ronnie Earl presented, and he got mad at him in there.
And the grand jurors couldn't believe it.
The grand jury said it was very, very tense in there.
And then there's this.
William Gibson, the foreman of the grand jury that returned the first indictment against Delay, said in an interview with Austin radio station KLBJ on Wednesday that he was friends with a Democratic candidate who had been defeated by the corporately funded ad campaign run by the Texas Association of Business in 2002.
James Sylvester, one of the losing Democratic candidates who had sued the business group, worked at the Travis County Sheriff's Office.
Gibson is retired from that same office.
Now, Gibson, we had audio soundbites of this guy yesterday furnished to us by KLBJ, our affiliate in Austin.
And those sound bites, Gibson admitted that he had made up his mind about the guilt of Delay before he had even heard any grand jury testimony, which to me equals the sleaze factor we expect from a prosecutor like this.
We do know that most of the grand jury members were Democrats, but that'd be hard to avoid given the makeup of Travis County.
I don't want to read a whole lot into that, but this Gibson guy has now said a couple of very interesting things.
We didn't know he had said this in the interview yesterday.
We just had heard about the soundbites, and that's what we asked for, where he admitted that he'd made up his mind about Delay's guilt even before the grand jury was impaneled, even before he heard any evidence from Ronnie Earle.
But he also said that he was friends with a Democratic candidate who had been defeated by the corporately funded ad campaign run by Texas Association of Business in 2002.
His buddy was James Sylvester, one of the losing Democrat candidates who had sued the business group, worked at the Travis County Sheriff's Office.
Gibson is retired from the same office, so they were buds.
So you've got a political axe to grind going on in a grand jury.
Now, the question needs to be asked, how much politics is guiding prosecutors in this country?
I'll tell you, I have mentioned this to you last week and this week.
This whole notion of criminalizing conservatism and criminalizing Republicans simply because that's what they believe.
The liberals cannot beat us in the arena of ideas.
They couldn't defeat delay at the ballot box.
And so here comes a criminal indictment that really looks more and more like a political indictment.
And we now know that the grand jury foreman of the first foreman didn't care what the evidence was.
He was prepared to indict Delay anyway.
Delay was guilty in his mind.
And now we find out that he had a buddy in the sheriff's office in Travis County that lost an election, in his opinion, because of ads run by the Texas Association of Business associated with delay in a roundabout circuitous way.
And so he had a political axe to grind and a political animus.
So this guy ends up as the grand jury foreman.
But this grand jury wouldn't even return an indictment of anything more than conspiracy.
There was a third grand jury that we've now learned about, and this grand jury wouldn't go for anything.
And Delay or Ronnie Earl got mad at him in there.
And these grand jurors are describing this unreal scene in the grand jury room where they felt very uneasy and nervous because Ronnie Earl was just hammering them for refusing to indict, even though he didn't have the evidence.
So we've got a Ronnie Earl soundbite here.
You know, there's this movie.
Ronnie Earl allowed cameras, movie cameras to follow him around as he was investigating the delay case.
The movie is called The Big Guy.
And we have a clip from this movie of Ronnie Earl.
Here is what he says.
Both the Democrats and the Republicans walk around corporate America, walk up and down corporate America's main street with their hand out, asking, you know, demanding some most like protection money.
I mean, this is a problem for our country.
It's every bit as insidious as terrorism.
Right.
Every bit as insidious as terrorism.
Campaign finance is as insidious as terrorism.
And this is the guy who's on a personal vendetta, a crusade that some might say has nothing to do with delay.
It has everything to do with delay.
It's the crusade that gives him the excuse to go after delay.
He can say he's all concerned about all this money in politics, but does that make him unique?
And does it make anybody in politics unique that they're swandered and surrounded by a bunch of money?
Does it make delay unique at all?
We are learning that this is no question a political indictment.
It is a political pursuit.
It's a political case.
And if a Democrat prosecutor has enough motivation, it is apparent that it's simply enough to pursue them on the basis that their criminality stems from their ideology and party affiliation.
That's what it looks like to be here in the Delay case.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue in a moment.
Hi, welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh with a little bit more on the Louis Free book.
The title of the book is My FBI, Bringing Down the Mafia, Investigating Bill Clinton and Waging War on Terror.
Louis Free, the former director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, St. Martin's Press, is the publisher.
So it's not some, it's not a conservative publishing group that the media can go after.
So I want to read, we got a little bit more information on this book now.
And I think Snerdley is right.
I think by tomorrow, we're going to see profiles of what a rotgut reprobate Louis Free was and how the FBI was falling apart under his leadership and Clinton was doing everything he could to save it and believed in Free and thought he was worth keeping.
And so I can just see all this coming now.
Former FBI Director Louis Free says publicly for the first time that his relationship with President Clinton, the man who appointed him, was a terrible one because Clinton's scandals made him a constant target of FBI investigations.
Free discloses this and many other details of his dealings with the Clinton White House in a new book, My FBI, Bringing Down the Mafia, Investigating Bill Clinton and Fighting the War on Terror.
Free has taped an interview with Mike Wallace for 60 minutes.
It'll be broadcast on Sunday.
In the book, he writes the problem was with Bill Clinton, the scandals and the rumored scandals, the incubating ones, the dying ones.
They never ended.
Whatever moral compass the president was consulting was leading him in the wrong direction.
His closets were just full of skeletons, waiting to burst out.
The director sought to distance himself from Clinton because of Whitewater refusing a White House pass that would have enabled him to enter the building without signing in.
That irked Clinton.
I wanted all my visits to be official, Free said.
When I sent the pass back with a note, I had no idea it would antagonize the president, he tells Mike Wallace.
Returning the pass was only the start of the rift.
Later, relations got so bad that Clinton reportedly began referring to Free as that bleeping free.
Says Free, I don't know how they referred to me, and I really don't care.
My role and my obligation was to conduct criminal investigations.
He, unfortunately for the country and unfortunately for him, happened to be the subject of that investigation.
In another revelation, Free says the former president let down the American people and the families of victims of the Cobar Towers terror attack in Saudi Arabia.
After promising to bring to justice those responsible for the bombing that killed 19 and injured hundreds, Free says that Clinton refused to personally ask Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah to allow the FBI to question bombing suspects that the kingdom had in custody.
That's the only way the Bureau could secure the interviews, according to Free.
So he writes in the book, Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the Crown Prince that he understood the Saudis' reluctance to cooperate with the FBI, and then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution to the Clinton Presidential Library.
Says Free, that's a fact that I'm reporting.
The most unsavory of those investigations was the one concerning Clinton and Lewinsky.
The White House intern had kept a semen-stained dress as proof of a relationship, and a Clinton blood sample was needed to match the DNA and the dress.
Well, it was like a bad movie, and it was ridiculous that Ken Starr and myself, the director of the FBI, find ourselves in that ridiculous position, he says to Mike Wallace.
But we did it very carefully, very confidentially.
As he explains the plan in the book, Clinton was at a scheduled dinner and excused himself to go to the bathroom.
Instead of the restroom, he entered another room where FBI medical technicians were waiting to take a blood sample.
Free says he was determined to stay on as FBI director until President Clinton left office so that Clinton could not appoint his successor.
I was concerned about who he would put in there as FBI director because he had expressed antipathy for the FBI for the director.
So I was going to stay there and make sure he couldn't replace me, Louis Free says to Mike Wallace.
So the interview is taped.
It will air regardless where Louis Free is by Sunday night.
And it will be interesting to see, folks.
Let's just see if Snerdley's right that between now and the Sunday papers, including the Sunday papers, there will be scathing profiles of Louis Free, how hapless he was, how incompetent he was, and that Clinton wanted to get rid of him but didn't think it would look good in the middle of these investigations to get rid of the head of the FBI.
It would make Clinton look even guiltier.
So he gutted it up.
He bit the lower lip and he hung in there.
And he tried his best to work with Louis Free, but the man, as you can see in this book, is just impossible.
I can write what the media is going to write about him myself because I know.
Here's Ed in Palm City, Florida.
Hi, Ed.
Welcome to the program.
Hey, Rush, pleasure to talk to you, bud.
Thank you, sir.
Longtime listener since 82 and a retired Army field grade officer.
Just a comment about that Marine that you had on earlier.
Yeah.
Calling our commander-in-chief a wimp where he wimped out.
My personal feeling, and I'll take this to the grave with me, that the man took courage in nominating not only Brown but Meyer, only because he didn't listen to the left wind or the right wind.
He made his own decision.
You know, Robert Novak has a column out today that theorizes, speculates, asserts, whatever word you want to use, that Clinton ended up choosing Harriet Myers because he was angry at conservatives for putting the kibosh on his buddy Al Gonzalez as the attorney general.
He's talking about George Bush, not Clinton.
George Bush.
Yeah, I thought you just said Clinton.
I'm sorry.
Did I say Clinton?
I think so.
I'm sorry.
Yeah, Novak said that Bush chose Harriet Myers as sort of a, all right, take this, you conservatives, because they had so lobbied him and worked him over about not appointing his buddy Al Gonzalez.
So that's, I only mention that to you because your theory is that he did this to defy the base and to show leading to so he could show courage, forget about defying the base, because I know he doesn't care about polls and he doesn't care about the base.
He cares about loyalty, and there are a lot of people on the right and the Republican Party, and I know definitely on the left, that are not loyal to him.
So he says, I'm sticking with loyal people.
Well, I know you're right about he's being big on loyalty, but let me ask you a question about that, Ed.
There are a lot of conservatives that held their nose over Ted Kennedy writing the education bill.
They stuck with him.
They held their nose over the signing of campaign finance reform, and they stuck with him.
Where were they not loyal?
Loyal in his decisions, loyal in backing him up, loyal in our case.
They did back him up.
They didn't, you know, the truth be known, these same conservatives you're talking about on Harriet Myers would have gone over to the dark side after campaign finance reform and Ted Kennedy writing the education bill if it weren't for the war.
True.
True, true.
And I was in that war too, by the way, so it's.
Were you?
Yep.
Oh, God bless you.
But they hung in.
I mean, I understand what you're saying about loyalty, and I understand it to a certain degree, but I think that there has been some loyalty.
I think what you're saying is that while they hung in and supported him, they still let it be known that they weren't happy with what he was doing.
And maybe he considered that to be disloyal.
I don't know.
Only speculating on your point, but it could be.
Yeah, well.
But your main point is you think it's courageous to do this.
Absolutely.
To not listen to all this advice and say, I'm going to do it my way.
And if you don't like it, screw you.
Because he's made, not screw you, but I'm going to do it my way because my decisions so far have been correct.
Well, he is the president, and all these conservatives, including me, complaining about it, we aren't.
I mean, it's not our choice to make.
You're absolutely right, but we had some hopes.
We'll take a break and be back.
Don't go away.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
I got a little problem out there, ladies and gentlemen.
At least one hotel chain has asked some, this is from Brookhaven, Mississippi, has asked some Hurricane Katrina evacuees to check out so it can honor the reservations of incoming guests.
It's the Hilton Hotel chain, the parent company of Hampton Inn and other brands, trying to find other rooms for the evacuees, but said they were warned when they checked in that their stays would be limited by room availability.
We're doing our very best to accommodate these people.
It's an uncomfortable situation for the hotel industry.
Risk bad publicity for kicking out hurricane evacuees or anger big spending repeat customers who travel for business.
And I've seen other stories out of Massachusetts.
I think it's Massachusetts, some state, but I think it's Massachusetts, where they want permission to look into the backgrounds of the evacuees that are in their states.
A lot of states are doing that.
Yeah.
So, yeah, it's, you know, it's always something.
It's just always something.
Try this.
Had this in the stack yesterday and I didn't get to it, so I made sure I get to it today.
This is from Oregon, where they have these deaf activists out there.
They want to kill people.
Well, they want to commit.
By the way, I have a question, actually an email question from a guy calling himself Genghis Genghis Ken Lieb or Live in Middletown, Ohio.
Dear Maha Rushi, the first part of the word suicide, sua, means alone in Latin.
So how in the world can you commit an act that by the very construction of the word itself means doing it on your own, depending on the assistance of some other person?
Maybe the genius that came up with this idiocy could ask former Surgeon General Jocelyn Elders to explain this, since he knows all about doing things on your own.
What he means by that is that Jocelyn Elbers' elders wanted to teach masturbation as a means of, in the public schools, as a means of reducing strategically transmitted or sexually transmitted diseases.
We're not doing enough educating on masturbation, she said, when she was Clinton's surgeon general.
So it's a good question.
But anyway, in Oregon, they've got these deaf activists out there, and they're trying, you know, the case was argued before the Supreme Court called assisted suicide, where a doctor basically, here's another question.
As I understand it, and I don't fully understand the meat and potatoes of the law, but as I understand it, you go get approved by two doctors that you're terminal and that you're getting a psychological test that you're competent to decide that you want to juice yourself.
So the doctor gives you a prescription for some drug that you take that offs you.
Now, I don't know, I'm sure they've accommodated for this, folks.
I'm sure they've accommodated it.
But how, let's say, let's say that you snurdily wanted to juice yourself out there.
You're in Oregon.
Let's say you didn't want to juice yourself.
You wanted to juice your girlfriend.
So you go get the approval that you're terminal or what have you from these two doctors, that you get the prescription, you give it to her.
It's a hypothetical, granted, but what's to prevent this from happening?
Again, I'm not fully up to speed on all the safeguards.
Can you imagine what safeguards in suicide?
I love it.
At any rate, an Oregon woman whose doctor convinced her that he could cure her lower back pain by having sex with her is suing him and his medical clinic for $4 million, according to legal documents obtained on Monday.
The doctor Randall Smith, who was 50 at the time, was stripped of his license and sent to jail for 60 days last year for charging the state's Oregon Health Plan $5,000 for his 45-minute treatments involving the woman.
Now, you know, I'm 54 and I've learned some things in the course of my life.
You know where I'm going with this, Dawn?
The woman got 45 minutes and she's suing.
Doctor.
Only kidding, folks.
Rush, you're so insensitive.
No, I'm so funny.
Seriously, 45 minutes he's suing.
Isn't the normal complaint two or three minutes and that's it?
Dr. Smith's medical treatment included intercourse in which he told a plaintiff was needed to help alleviate the plaintiff's lower back and lower extremity pain, the former patient said in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit, which charges battery negligence and intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress, was filed Friday in Multnomah County Court.
We never comment on lawsuits, said a spokesman for the Adventist Medical Group Clinic in Gresham, Oregon, where Smith works.
Smith couldn't be located for comment.
Though he pleaded guilty for submitting false health care claims of felony, he maintained the sex with the 47-year-old woman was consensual.
Sex treatment for back pain.
All right, let's stick with Oregon, shall we, ladies and gentlemen?
I want to give you an illustration.
I have a comment from last night on CNN.
Lou Dobbs tonight, Jeffrey Toobin, who is the legal, I'm sorry, the senior legal analyst for CNN, was talking about the oral arguments at the Supreme Court yesterday in the assisted suicide death activist case.
And Lou Dobbs' question to Jeffrey Toobin was this.
Was it your sense as you watch these oral arguments, there was a broad sense of humanity?
We know that Justice Roberts is also deeply religious.
The personal convictions and the emotions, the humanity involved here, was it evident on the part of the justices?
Absolutely.
Remember, Ruth Bader Ginsburg has had cancer.
John Paul Stevens has had cancer.
Stephen Breyer's wife is a psychologist who counsels cancer patients for a living.
So this is something that is not abstract to them.
And I think they will deal with this with considerable sensitivity, though I would guess that the Oregon law will probably fall compared to the federal rights law.
Toobin may be right about that, but that's not the point that I wanted to make or the question I wanted to ask you.
Because you know what, I'll bet you, I'll just, I seldom wager on the outcome of Supreme Court cases, but if I had to wager on this one, I would say that the justices of this court are not going to weaken federal drug laws and are going to strike the Oregon law down.
The federal drug laws are hugely important to the federal government.
Since drugs are involved in the assisted suicide, doctor-assisted suicide, I'll bet you it's on that basis, partially at least, that the Supreme Court strikes this down.
But that's not the point.
The point is this.
It is irrelevant whether any of the justices all have personal connections to cancer, which is a terminal disease.
And it somehow that that should have something to do with how they rule in the case.
But I will guarantee you, having said that, there are people in this audience and you know who you are.
You cannot believe I would be that insensitive.
You can't believe that I would say that.
Why, Rush?
Come on.
They can't take their practical real-life experiences in there and use that sensitivity to understand the plight of the people of Oregon and why they voted this way?
Not supposed to.
Go ask any reputable lawyer, trial lawyer, whatever, anybody, ask a judge, ask them if emotion plays a role in the decision making, in the deciding of cases.
Well, Rush, well, rush.
In a murder case, they let the victim's family come in at sentencing and they unload at the convict.
Yeah, after sentencing.
The emotion of all this, not supposed to be a factor.
Whether or not any of these justices on the court have a personal connection to terminal diseases, themselves, their families, or what have you, is irrelevant to ruling on the law.
That is the point, and that's why I wanted to play this because it's an exercise in illustrating what I have been trying to say about the whole role of the court.
It's not supposed to identify with people and then rule on the basis of somebody's emotion, sensitivity, or feelings.
It's strictly a case of law here.
And it's a tough question, by the way.
The people of Oregon have voted twice by large margins for this.
And here comes the federal government Supreme Court going to rule on whether or not they can.
This is a really, really tough question.
But whether or not there's sensitivity because there's a direct connection to what's being discussed is not supposed to.
In fact, in most cases, it would lead to recusal.
You won't know the truth.
We'll be back in just a second.
Stay with us.
Sandy Burglar, two days after he's placed on probation last month for taking classified documents, was accused of reckless driving in Virginia by police, who said he was traveling 88 miles per hour in a 55-mile per hour zone.
He has an appearance before a judge, same federal magistrate who had sentenced him on September the 8th.
Deborah Robinson admonished him, said she'll decide eventually whether to punish Sandy Burglar any further.
And of course, folks, you know, we're coming up on the holiday season.
It's October.
I'm driving around town, and people already have the pumpkins out there and the witch costumes and the hobgoblins and so forth.
Christmas, well, I said, yeah, Christmas trees, everything.
All these things are out there.
So that means we get the obligatory media stories on the horrors of the upcoming holiday season.
I happen to have in my formerly nicotine-stained finger just such a story from why.
Who would have thought?
The AP Business Wire, Anna Dinocenzio.
The outlook for the holiday shopping season grew murkier today as the nation's big retailers reported September sales figures that revealed consumers' growing anxiety about the economy.
Americans struggling with higher gasoline price.
By the way, those of you people getting rid of your SUVs, I am disappointed in you.
I'm seeing stories all over the news that you gutsy, courageous SUV drivers are getting rid of them because of gas price.
Well, let me tell you something.
The oil price has fallen below 60 bucks.
And hey, the oil prices, it's coming down.
You don't need to get rid of your SUVs.
Hold on to those dudes.
You know, don't get as big a Christmas tree this year or something.
Don't cave into this pressure.
You don't think the environmentalist wackos are going to get rid of their SUVs, do you?
Anyway, back to the story.
Americans struggling with higher gasoline prices and the economic fallout from Hurricane Katrina shop for basics at discounters.
And so retailers, including Walmart, had a solid month, but they avoided spending on non-essential items, leaving many mall-based apparel stores, including the Gap, Ann Taylor, and Talbot's, disappointed.
The question now is: how generous will shoppers be during the holiday season?
You know, it is astounding to meet.
Folks, do you realize that according to the United States media, every year holiday shoppers shop for bargains?
And this is unpatriotic.
Only at the holiday season should you go out there and find the most expensive item you can or get the item where it costs more than anywhere else and buy it there.
But for some reason, you in great Americans, you bargain shop and you bargain hunt at the holiday season.
And I read about it every year.
Every year, people are looking for the best deals.
And the rest of the year, nobody cares about finding good deals or the best deals, whatever something costs, you buy it.
But when the holiday season comes around, it's amazing.
You can make book that this every year for the last 20 years has been out there.
Holiday season.
The American people are shopping for discounts.
Unfortunately, this only helps Walmart, who we hate.
Meanwhile, great MTV outfits like the Gap are starving because you people don't have the guts to spend the right amount of money on the right stores.
Just amazing.
So it's holiday season, and folks, it's doom and gloom.
You're going to get more and more of this.
It's horrible.
You're going to be told you don't have any money.
You're going to be told you're going to get fired.
You're going to be told you're one paycheck away from being homeless.
Then you're going to read about all your neighbors to whom that's already happened.
Then you're going to read about all these skyrocketing gas prices.
Then you're going to see Louis Free's mug shot in the post office when you go may the bills that you can't make the full payment on.
You're going to have all these horrors surrounding you.
They're going to say we're losing in Iraq.
We have no chance of beating bin Laden.
We ought to get out of Iraq.
Bush has blown the chance to win the 2006 elections to the Republic.
It's just going to be horrible out there.
And here's the first take on it from the Associated Press.
Holiday shopping season outlook gets murky.
The truth is that even during this recovering economy that has been rocking and rolling all along, the stories have never reflected that.
Experts were surprised this month.
When housing starts reaching an all-time high, experts were surprised.
When consumer confidence sky experts were surprised.
It's always bad news, even in the best of times.
Except, of course, with the Democrats in the White House, there are never any bad times.
And if you think there are, you are just a blooming idiot.
Here's Mark in Upland, Indiana.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Thank you, Rush.
Ditto is from Taylor University.
I want to get to my point quick.
Don't we need to think about the poor in this Oregon assisted suicide issue?
I mean, will the government provide the prescription drugs for them to kill themselves?
I mean, it's kind of a middle-class warfare here that we can afford the drugs to kill ourselves, but the poor can't.
Excellent question.
Excellent question because people whose health insurance, health insurance, will cover their suicide drugs.
Right.
Is it tough cookies for the poor?
I mean, don't they?
Yeah, I know.
And if the poor, of course, now, Oregon's a liberal state.
Are there any poor there?
Well, probably not.
You may not have the problem in Oregon because, you know, it's a very liberal state.
It's a utopia out there.
Right.
There may not be any.
It may not matter.
Only when this practice spreads beyond Oregon will this affect.
But yeah, I would think that in order to be fair, it's not fair that middle class or upper middle class people should be able to kill themselves, assisted suicide themselves, when the poor can't.
Yeah, that's an excellent question.
Because in the realm of fairness, which is what America is all about, well, that's it.
Mark, I got the idea.
Forget it.
We don't need to expand the Medicaid budget.
HR got a brilliant idea here.
We don't need to expand the Medicaid budget.
We want to spend another penny.
All we need to do is cut the food stamp program and starve the poor to death.
And they will die in a state of euphoria.
Folks, if you want to read, I had the story here.
I just didn't have a chance to get to it.
If you want to read an excellent piece that just takes Ronnie Earle apart as a prosecutor, go to National Review Online.
We'll link to it at rushlimbaugh.com.
You can go to National Review Online yourself.
There's a great piece there by one of their contributors, Andrew McCarthy, who's a former prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.
That's Manhattan.
And you just read this and you'll find out what a hack this guy is.
And, you know, here's Ronnie Earle walking around all concerned about all the money in politics.
And this is the guy that shakes down corporations he indicts and withdraws charges if they will contribute to one of his pet causes.
This is a guy that goes to fundraisers attended by Dan Rather's daughter, Robin, and brags about, I'm going to get delay.
So there's no question that Ronnie Earle is a political hack and that this is a political indictment of delay simply because he's a successful Republican.
We're trying to criminalize Republicans and conservatives.
All right.
I wish I had time to talk to all you people on the phone.
I have to fly out of town.
I'll be back tomorrow.
No big deal.
Late after about two in the morning, I'll get back, but I got to go to D.C. Big bash tonight.
National Review's 50th anniversary.
And I'm one of the hosts.
So I'm scatting, but I'll be back here tomorrow.
I'll talk to you then.
▲
Export Selection