All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 7, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:16
October 7, 2005, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi folks, welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh having more fun.
And a human being should be allowed to have its Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open live Friday.
The telephone number is 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
All right.
We've been focusing on one or two, three subjects each and every day because they've been so powerful.
The Harriet Myers nomination, The War with a Rock.
But there's a lot of stuff in the stack today.
It's lighthearted.
It's serious.
It's off the wall.
And I want to get to as much of it as possible.
As well as your phone calls.
So one thing, folks, I have to tell you this.
I just received word that our Mike Mamone, the regular broadcast engineer, is on a vacation this week, which means his wife wanted to go shopping.
So Mike Aldamont is the substitute broadcast engineer, and I was just told that Aldamont is not feeling well.
And that saddens me.
He's double vision, blurry, feeling lightheaded and so forth.
And management, the boss of engineers, John Creeley, is standing by to step in should Altamont cave on us.
Now, everybody knows this would be in effect a union strike.
If Aldamont caves with Mamon gone, that means management will step in.
We all know that management totally screws it up when they step in to do Labor's job.
We all know this.
So I just want to warn you, there may be some, this may not sound as smooth as it normally does when Creeley steps in there, but don't worry, Aldamont will still get the blame at the end of the day.
A little email here from our Southern Command.
You know, I don't know what's going on with this radio station here in West Palm Beach, but for at least the last week, your show is being joined in progress.
It's become very annoying.
They used to pop into some other show at 2.15 every afternoon, and they always do a disappointing job of engineering your show.
I'm hoping you can put a bug in their ear.
By the way, my husband said I could be your Loxahatchee mistress as long as he gets to play golf.
And herein, ladies and gentlemen, we learn the real reason men play golf.
This is, I guess, Faye is her name.
I don't have a mistress in Loxahatchee, so we'll put you on the list.
What did I say yesterday?
I said, after the Louis Free book blurbs came out and the excerpts of his interviews on the 60 Minutes this Sunday, I said before the weekend is out, before either by or before the Sunday shows and Sunday papers, the mainstream media will circle the wagons around Bill Clinton and start attacking Louis Free and make him the story.
My friends, I didn't know how right I would be in terms of how quickly this has started.
I have two stories on this.
First from Deborah Oren in the New York Post in a bombshell interview.
Former FBI chief Louis Free charges that President Bill Clinton had a faulty moral compass and sold out U.S. troops killed in a 1996 Saudi bombing in exchange for cash for the Clinton Library.
The problem was with Bill Clinton, Free says in an interview to be aired Sunday on 60 Minutes.
The scandals, 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 full of skeletons just waiting to burst out.
Let me step in and say something.
As you people know, well, you may not know.
Well, you do.
I am very much involved in the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation, which raises money for the children, scholarship education scholarships for children of Marines killed in action.
And during massive disasters, they expand their help to the children of those killed in other services.
Oklahoma City, for example, in 9-11, Secret Service, Customs, Army, Air Force, whatever, they step in and help.
And most of these people, a lot of these people that I know who are former Marines, many are in the FBI or have been FBI.
And I know many of them who personally know Louis Free.
This is the point.
And I have people that are very good friends of mine.
And I remember back when Louis Free was the FBI director vouching for him and talking about what a devoted public servant that he was and what a tough time he was having.
And I just want to tell you, although I don't know Louis Free and I've never met him, I just want to tell you, if somebody wants me to balance the morals and ethics of Louis Free versus Bill Clinton, I can tell you which side's going to come down for me.
So I mention that as I go through the rest of the story.
Louis Free says that after the Cobar Towers, the FBI wanted to investigate the suspects that the Saudis had rounded up, and the Saudis refused.
So Clinton went over there.
And by the way, now learn a little bit more about the trip.
He took 40 people at Saudi expense on this trip or on a trip, including the founders of Google, a bunch of actors, and some other people, all expenses paid for by the Saudis.
Clinton gets over there and he tells the Saudis, I understand why you don't want to open up your investigation.
That makes total sense.
And then he hit him up for a donation to his presidential library massage parlor.
And Free writes about this.
In the book, My FBI, it's going to be released next week, Free contends that the only way for the FBI to get those vital interviews was for Clinton to press Crown Prince Abdullah, who is now king.
Instead, Free charges the president took a dive for the Saudis.
Bill Clinton raised the subject only to tell the Crown Prince that he understood the Saudis' reluctance to cooperate.
And then he hit Abdullah up for a contribution at Clinton Presidential Library and Massage Parlor, Louis Free writes.
That's a fact I'm reporting.
Well, Clinton spokesman Jay Carson rejected Free's allegations as untruths and noted that since leaving the FBI, Free has given $18,000 to Republicans, including President Bush.
So here comes the smear of Louis Free.
Now, normally, folks, this is something when Hillary books come out.
Normally, when a tell-all book is written about a public figure, the media is eager for more.
Why?
How does this person know it?
And that person becomes a big celebrity and makes the rounds of all the news shows and the talk shows.
But when one of these books comes out about the Clintons, either Bill or Hillary, have you noticed the author always ends up being insane or partisan or disturbed or some such thing?
They circle the wagons and they go after the author.
But it's unlike any other tell-all book.
Somebody comes out with a book about Bush or forged memos about Bush.
And boy, I mean, it's accepted for gospel.
And they take it and run even further with it than the original sourcing did.
Jay Carson told the New York Post last night, this is a total work of fiction written by a man who's desperate to sell books.
It's unfortunate he would stoop to this level in a desperate attempt to rewrite history and clear his name.
Louis Free was not even present for the meetings he describes during which President Clinton repeatedly and firmly pressed the Saudis for cooperation on the Kobar Towers investigation, which led to the eventual indictments.
The Clinton spokesman said, Louis Free's claims about library fundraising are more untruths than a book that is clearly not short on them.
The Clinton library, though, has declined to reveal the specific amount of money donated by top Saudis, but reports have put it in the millions.
The mother of one U.S. serviceman murdered at Cobar Towers told the Post yesterday she believes Free's devastating charge against the former president is true.
I have every faith in Louis Free.
He did a lot for the Cobar families, and I have to trust his word.
This is Carol Hahn, whose son, Captain Leland Hahn, Air Force Navigator, killed in that blast.
She added that under President Bush, the FBI maintains contact with the Kobar families, and she believes that the Bush White House cares about solving that attack.
They do more than the Clinton administration ever did.
Well, we know the Clinton administration didn't care about terrorism.
But I'm going to tell you something.
All these denials, this has taken us back to the Clinton years.
There'd be all these things that come out.
Every time it's untrue, nothing to it.
Clinton administration, if you went to work for the Clinton administration, either the press office or in the chief of staff office, your job was to lie for a liar.
And Matt LaCarty's job was more special.
He was in charge of cover-ups for a while.
Clinton has maintained friendly ties with the Saudis since leaving office.
In January 2002, he got $750,000 in speaking fees for going to Saudi Arabia.
On a 2003 Saudi visit, Clinton brought along 40 friends at Saudi expense in a private plane, including the actors Chevy Chase and John Kusek and the two founders of Google.
This was in the New York Sun.
The Saudis then flew Clinton and his pals to the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, and then on to Germany.
Less than three months later, Clinton praised Saudi Arabia to the 9-11 Commission.
So the trashing of Louis Free has begun, and it will only get worse as the weekend unfolds.
A quick timeout.
We'll be back and continue here right after this.
Okay, we're back at 800-282-2882.
Yesterday, I predicted this.
Predicted this.
Now, see, I told you so.
Bush gives the great speech in Iraq, says that we foiled 10 al-Qaeda attacks, some of them on this country's soil.
And I'm watching CNN afterwards, and they're getting, oh, really?
Well, we're going to fact-check that.
That's the one thing in the speech.
They wanted to prove Bush was lying.
Here is the excerpt from Bush's speech yesterday.
Overall, the United States and our partners have disrupted at least 10 serious al-Qaeda terrorist plots since September the 11th, including three al-Qaeda plots to attack inside the United States.
We've stopped at least five more al-Qaeda efforts to case targets in the United States or infiltrate operatives into our country because of the steady progress the enemy has wounded.
But the enemy is still capable of global operations.
So the ABC News Network, in addition to CNN, they all did, sent a reporter out there to find out if Bush was lying.
And the reporter, in this case, Brian Ross, finds out why, it's true.
What Bush said is actually true.
Which, of course, is not news.
It'd be more news if something Bill Clinton said was true.
So then after the report, ABC goes to find Richard Clark, late of the 9-11 Commission hearing fiasco.
And you'll hear him say in this report that, well, just because we've stopped some plots doesn't mean we've been successful.
Here's that whole bite.
Of course, for every one of the 10 plots the president said had been disrupted, there are dozens of others, Diane, that have been successful, although none in this country.
Which raises questions again for Dick Clark.
Why have they been successful in stopping it here?
Well, they've been successful in stopping it here because there's no indigenous organization here in the United States.
Many of these plots that were thwarted overseas were done by regional affiliates of al-Qaeda.
The danger in this kind of 10 list, top 10 list of things we've stopped, is it'll give the American people the wrong message.
It could give the American people the message that we're being very successful, and maybe they can be a little complacent.
Oh, come on, Dick.
Why don't you just turn around and say that you don't want to give Bush any credit?
Nobody's going to end up getting complacent here because of this.
If they're going to get complacent, it's because the Democratic Party is out there trying to tell everybody that Al-Qaeda is not a threat.
And the Democratic Party's out there trying to tell everybody that we caused this terrorism and that we're responsible for it.
We created terrorism, in fact, by going into Iraq.
That's the real problem.
This is just amazing.
What do you mean there aren't any indigenous organizations here?
I would bet that he would be surprised to find out how many cells there are in this country.
He was the guy that should know.
And how about the tone of this?
Well, of course, for every one of the 10 plots the president said been disrupted, there are dozens of others, Diane, that have been successful, although none in this country.
Well, that's what he said.
Just have to nitpick this, and it's classic.
Whatever good news that's happening just cannot be allowed to stand.
It's got to be recast and repositioned as either no news, president making things up, or now this is not good to say.
The problem with the top 10 list is it's got to make the American people complacent.
Yeah, I'd tell you we just overreacted at Penn Station.
What the hell is this, Mr. Clark?
Well, you overracked up there.
I think, I think there's, yes, the wrong, it's.
Yeah, that's exactly right, Mr. Sterdley.
Folks, here's a good lesson for you.
According to the Democrats and Brian Ross at ABC and Richard Clark, when you're successful, the wrong message is to say you've been successful.
When you succeed, be humble and complain about your failures.
To the phones, Bobby in Quincy, Massachusetts.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Thank you very much.
Hey, we're about a quarter of the way into the football season.
I was just curious, you know, what's so wrong with the Patson what's so right with the Redskins this year so far?
Well, the Redskins are a myth.
The Redskins are the worst 3-0 team in the history of the National Football League, and they'll find out this weekend.
Yeah, tough one.
But the Patriots, you know, I'm a little bit afraid to talk about the Patriots because Marty Schottenheimer opened up with what he thought's wrong with the Patriots, and Willie McGinnis and Tom Brady are now gunning for him.
Did you hear what Schottenheimer said?
Yeah, well, I heard Brady.
I didn't hear Marty say exactly what he said, but I heard Brady responding to what Marty said.
Well, what Schottenheimer said was they've been a great team for four years, but not, I mean, you just can't absorb this many injuries.
He was basically saying the scrubs just don't cut it.
But he didn't say that, but that's the way the Patriots interpret it.
Patriots pride themselves on respecting their opponent.
They never talk about the opponent.
They don't trash talk.
They don't.
And the only guy that speaks for them is their coach, Belichick.
So Brady's out there saying, we give the other team the respect it deserves.
Our coach will speak for us.
We don't need to hear what Schottenheimer thinks.
And from the sound, and McGinnis said the same thing.
Well, you support what Brady said.
I don't know what Brady said, but he's on my team.
I support it.
Yeah, I just think their injuries just have them.
They're in a position they've never been in before.
Well, I'll tell you what, I wouldn't want to be the Atlanta Falcons Sunday because that's who the Patriots have next, and this is going to fire them up.
Now, Schottenheimer's put it out there that the Patriots are finished, that they can't overcome these obstacles and these injuries.
And unwittingly, he may have just fired these guys back up again more than they can be.
But I just wait until somebody beats these guys, they're still the champions.
You can't wipe them out.
They have too many good players still at skill positions.
And it's still early, as you say.
We're at the quarter turn.
Tom and St. Louis, welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Kiddo's Rush from the Next World Series champion, St. Louis Cardinal.
Thank you, sir.
I got a question for you.
Yeah.
How come all these guys have to wait to write a book to line their own pockets with some money instead of coming clean with all this stuff when they're in power?
Well, that actually is an interesting question.
Particularly, I'll take you back in time.
So many people may have forgotten what I thought.
I am stunned that it's taken this long for one of these books to come from the Clinton administration.
And frankly, I thought there would be tons of them.
But one of the things that's amazed me, it's constantly amazed me throughout all of this stuff, Monica, Whitewater, Jennifer, what was it, Kathleen Willey, the contempt of court, the impeachment, all this.
There hasn't been one defector from the Clinton camp.
There hasn't been one, there hadn't been anybody who's ratted him out.
And you know, you just know that there's something.
So here's the first book.
I can't, I mean, I don't know.
Freak, I don't think an acting FBI director is going to do this, whine and moan while he's in office and complain that the president's preventing him from doing his job.
That would be suicide.
I don't think anybody would have taken him seriously at the time.
He could probably read the political tea leaves, and I think probably didn't want to do any disservice to the FBI office.
He had pledged to run that.
As for writing a book, Louis Free has been in public service a long time, has a lot of big family, and I'm sure needs the money and wants it, is in the private sector earning it.
Maybe he thought a book is the best vehicle for getting this kind of information out because it was repeated over and over again as you do your tour and as people interview you about it.
But it still is a good question.
Where are these people that you would think would stand up and honor would prevail during the course of administration?
For example, I remember Madeline Albright, after the Lewinsky allegation was made, you know, Newsweek spiked it, Drudge ran it.
And here comes Madeline Albright with a whole bunch of Clinton administration.
We believe the print.
He'd gone out this.
I want to say this one more time.
I never had sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Kalinsky.
I never asked anybody to lie, not a single time.
Well, we all know it was flat out, 100% psychologically, pathologically lying, untrue.
And yet here came all these people out there believing it and bucking him up.
Hillary going on TV, vast right-wing conspiracy caused that cigar to show up in that room.
It caused Lewinsky to get the pizza delivery, caused Lewinsky to get hired.
I mean, it was absurd, and yet these people circled the wagons.
There's a lesson there, but I still think that over the coming years that there's going to be more of this kind of thing about the Clinton administration.
I just do.
And, you know, a book seems to be the vehicle that's used for these kinds of things these days.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
Why am I the most dangerous man in America?
Because I'm right.
And I was the lead weapon in the destruction of the left's media monopoly.
Rush Limbaugh, talent on loan from God here on Open Line Friday.
It's unbelievable.
You people remember the veteran broadcast journalist from the UK, David Frost, used to be married to Diane Carroll.
That was the week that was a funny news show back in the 60s and 70s in this country.
Nixon Watergate interviews, interviewed Tony Blair, interviewed every president and so forth.
He just announced he's going to appear on Al Sleazira, Al-Slazira International, the Pan-Arab News Network's new English language channel that will be launched next spring.
The Qatar-based, that's Qatar for those of you in the media, channel said that Sir David, who broadcast his final Breakfast with Frost program for the BBC in May, would be among the key on-air talent.
Sir David was quoted as saying he felt excitement about his new role.
Most of the TV I've done over the years has been aimed at British and American audiences.
Now I get to opine to terrorists.
Well, he didn't say that, but I mean, that's who watches Al Slazira.
He's joining the English language version.
A couple stories here before we go back to the phones.
A new study, what's this from?
This is, well, I don't know the source that's in, it's in channelcincinati.com.
My guess is it's a wire story.
And it's actually just a new approach to an old story: fat kids.
What do we do about fat kids?
A new study suggests the price of fresh fruits and vegetables has a stronger connection to weight gain among children than whether they live near fast food outlets.
This is the most ridiculous pile of blarney that I have ever don't.
You mean to tell me that if broccoli and carrots and cucumbers were cheaper, that your average crumb cruncher teenager would be scarfing that stuff down rather than going to McDonald's or Burger King?
How stupid do they think we are?
It adds more confusion to the muddy picture of what causes youngsters to gain weight.
It isn't muddy.
They eat more than they should.
That's what makes everybody gain weight.
There's no secret here.
Advocacy groups have suggested a strong link between obesity and the proximity of fast food restaurants or the lack of supermarkets stocked with fresh food.
Yeah, as though the average teenager is going to troll around the produce section.
For crap, folks, how stupid do these people think we are?
I'll tell you, I can give you a little insight, I think, into the weight problem of the modern American youth.
You know, when I was growing up, folks, and this is not that long ago in the 60s, 50s, we were tough.
We were tough Americans.
Life was so much tougher then than it is today.
If you went, if you had to go to the radio shack and then you wanted to go to the taco place and then you wanted to go to the, you had to go outdoors.
They weren't right next to each other in some giant mall with a roof.
You had to get wet.
You had to sweat if your car didn't have air conditioning.
It was tough out there.
Then you had to get in the car and you had to drive to all different places.
Watching television.
Growing up, maybe five channels if you had a PBS and a UHF in your town, but you had three basically.
You people, you young people, you just take everything for granted.
We had to get up and go to the TV and change the channel.
We got exercise.
You just sit there and all you get's a little finger exercise, thumb exercise.
You're just sitting there at your video game or your what have you.
Well, we were tough.
And that's why there wasn't all this obesity 30 and 40 years ago.
I even did, I was toying with an exercise video to illustrate this.
Because people, you know, Rush, you've lost a lot of weight over your life.
How did you do it?
Well, it was very easy.
When I popped popcorn, I didn't microwave it.
I got a pot and pan, and I put the oil in that pot, and I shook that popcorn pan.
I got exercise while I was popping it.
And I didn't, you know, I threw the remote away.
I got up out of the chair, folks, to change the channel.
That's as silly as telling us that produce is too expensive.
And that's why kids are becoming obese today.
Developers, this is from London.
Developers announced plans today to open a multi-million dollar sexual theme park near London's Piccadilly Circus, home to the much-photographed statue of the Greek god of love.
Backers say that the London Academy of Sex and Relationships, due to open next spring, will not be a sleazy sex museum, but rather an educational multimedia attraction that'll teach visitors to become better lovers and provide valuable information about disease and sexual problems.
They think that they are crusaders here and pioneers, but they're wrong.
We have the Clinton Library for all this.
We don't need to go to this museum in London.
Here's Tim in Philadelphia.
Tim, I wanted to give you some great stuff there to follow.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Thanks, Rush.
Flight level dittos from, well, I guess the left coast that's actually on the east.
I wanted to ask you about your trip last night.
You said you flew out of Washington to get home, and you mentioned you had to park your airplane all the way out of Dulles, and it took you, sounded like a good 45 minutes to get out there.
Is that right?
Yeah, it's about a 45 minutes.
It's even longer with the rush hour going into town.
Yeah.
You can't, a private plane can't land at National anymore.
A corporate plane can't.
Now, that's going to change in November, but it's only going to allow departures from certain airports in this country.
I'm not sure what they are, but I know mine's not on the list.
Right.
Only certain airports will be able to land.
Only certain airports of departure.
Flights from certain airports will be able to land at National.
And from what I understand, corporate planes are going to have to have security guards on board.
That's correct.
It's my understanding right now that if you wanted to go to National, you have to take your jet and land someplace they refer to as a gateway airport, pick up a security guard.
You've got to pay for that security guard and get him back to where he belongs to in order to land at National.
And I'm assuming you'll be able to do it under your operation.
But my current operation, I presently own a single-engine piper myself.
I can't go anywhere near that.
And presently, the FAA is taking their comments on making all of those arrangements permanent.
They want to make the air defense identification zone that surrounds Washington, D.C. a permanent fixture.
Well, they've got to do something because all of these single-engine and twin-engine prop pilots, turbojets, and so forth, look at how many of them have gone off course lately, and I don't know what the problem there is.
But no, no, you know, all it took, you know, Pentagon gets hit, and the flight that went down in Pennsylvania was either aiming at the White House or the Capitol.
I can totally understand their paranoia and, quote-unquote, their overreaction on this.
I am not, but I'm going to tell you something, Tim, I'm not going to mess with that to go into National.
I'm not going to do it.
If I have to go to Washington, which is as little as possible anyway, I will go to Dulles.
Well, I don't blame you.
But it's a gross overreaction.
And the air defense identification zone, it's only a 20- to 30-mile buffer, which is not big enough for jets, and it's too big for small airplanes like mine.
Well, tell people what you mean by that.
I mean, too small for a jet.
30 miles is nothing to a jet, but 30 miles is a lot in your piper.
Is that what you mean?
That's exactly it.
My airplane, you know, weighing at 3,000 pounds and traveling at 120 to 130 knots, it'll take me a long time to traverse that air defense identification zone.
However, you going probably 400 knots and weighing tens of thousands of pounds, actually, I hate to call you a threat, but you actually pose a threat.
By the way, it's 300 knots.
I've told the pilots to throttle back because of the school is too much.
I understand.
I have the same problem, but not on the same magnitude.
But this permanent air defense identification zone is completely unworkable because it takes all the airplanes like me and mixes them in with you, which is the incompatible mix of airplanes.
And I said it'll be permanent if the activity is.
Well, wait a minute, though.
Look, I know any airplane's an airplane, and they're all the same once you're in the sky in terms of system, but National doesn't want single-engine private planes flying in and out of there.
And you know that's part of the regulation.
It's like LaGuardia.
They don't want any corporate traffic at LaGuardia.
So what they've done, they've raised the landing fee there to something outrageously expensive.
It's stupid.
And they've scheduled all these airline departures at the equivalent of airline rush hour to do everything they can to discourage private aircraft from going into LaGuardia.
And it's the same thing with National.
They just don't want it.
Sure, sure.
And that's fine.
I don't really want to go to National all that much either, except that my brother lives right next to it.
I'd be happy with one of the other three general aviation airports that are just as close.
But I can't get to them under the present rules.
And when the rules become permanent, I won't be able to get to them.
Well, the only bit of solace I can give you is that nothing in Washington except Social Security is permanent.
Just a question of whether it'll be changed in your lifetime.
And we will keep your fingers crossed.
I understand the problem.
I get a good point about the 30-mile boundary here for somebody doing 120 knots.
They can readily identify you in that.
But can they?
Some of these other planes have permeated airspace and in two occasions they discovered them too late.
If they had been on a mission, they might have gotten close to succeeding it.
Succeeding with it.
I got to run, Tim.
I'm glad you called me back in just a second, folks.
Stay with us.
Okay, back to the phones on Open Line Friday, Somerville, New Jersey.
Hello, Doug.
I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Okay, thank you very much, Russ.
And how are you?
Fine.
Rush, speaking for my wife and myself, we try to do everything we can for the overall conservative movement.
My question pertains to the Senate vote of 90 to 9, which was, I think, designed to defy President Bush on interrogation of detainees.
Yes.
And my question is, why would seemingly good conservatives like Kay Bailey Hutchinson that you were with last night, Rick Centorum, and I could probably think of a lot of others, why would they vote to do such a thing?
I know last night Mark Levin gave the nine senators who voted for it, who became the nine, and I was surprised at a lot of names on there, and just why would they do that?
Well, I can only tell you what I think, and I think that it goes back to what I've always said.
Where do these people work?
They work in Washington.
What is the culture in Washington?
That we are mean, that we are horrible, that we abuse these poor innocents, that Abu Ghrab and Club Guitmo are nothing more than modern torture chambers set up in violation of human rights by George W. Bush.
The media is writing about this each and every day.
The New York Times is publishing pictures as often as they can.
The Washington Post ditto.
This is where these people live.
And it's just, it's the puzzling thing is it undermines the ability.
Here we are.
We just got the president the same day that he gives this speech, the day before he gives this speech, they do this.
Yes.
And he talks about how we've thwarted 10 recent al-Qaeda attacks, three in this country.
We just saw the overreaction to what happened in New York.
The question needs to be asked: if we catch, let's say New York was real, and let's say it was a nuke, and we catch the guy, and the nuke's going to go off in two hours.
Do we torture this guy to find out if we have to find out, you know, is his, do we torture this guy to save millions of people's lives in New York?
And sadly, there are people in this country who say no.
That's not who we are.
So, this, this, this, to me, I, I, the only word I can attach to it is uh, fear.
I, I, I think there's just a fear of the media culture, uh, and not because the way this is positioned publicly is: had this thing passed, the media would have portrayed it as Senate votes for torture.
Yes.
And the way it's cast, Senate votes against torture.
That's not what this is.
Senate, the real headline should have been: Senate votes to make it tougher to win war on terror.
That's right.
Senate undermines presidential effort to win war on terror by making it tougher to learn future plans of al-Qaeda and other terrorist operatives.
That's the real headline.
Right.
But since that's not going to be the headline, the headline is going to be: Senate votes to authorize more torture.
You can answer it.
They have the guts to have that headline written about them.
But I mean, why would Rick Santorum and Kay Bailey Hutchinson are they just becoming at the wrong time?
Do they realize that they work in Washington and that they're really just about getting reelected as opposed to following the overall conservative agenda?
Yeah, I'll tell you: no, in the case of those two, I don't know.
I mean, I'm just giving you a generalized answer.
Santorum is down badly in the polls in Pennsylvania, although not with his base.
I know.
So that, in his case, could be a problem.
Senator Hutchison, I don't know.
Usually, in something like this, where you're going to have a 90 to 9 vote or a 93 to 6 vote, normally the leadership will tell a various number of senators, hey, if you want to vote no on this for your own private, since it's going to pass anyway, go ahead.
I'm surprised that didn't happen.
I'm surprised that more people didn't take advantage of the fact that this was going to be a slam dunk and vote against it to make a statement for themselves.
Yes.
Yes.
So I know as to the individual concerns, there are obviously things above and beyond the fact that they just live in Washington and that's the culture.
But as to what the specifics of that may be, look, it could well be.
You have to consider that it could well be that they're just consumers of news like the rest of us, and they may think that what's going on is just horrible.
It's torture.
We're not going to authorize that this be allowed to continue.
And so they may personally think this as well.
The question is, how did that come to be?
And I think that's where the first answer then helps fill in the blanks.
looking at the clock.
I got to run.
Thanks for the call out there.
Quick timeout, and we'll be back in just a sec.
Stay with us.
We had just a drive-by caller.
Didn't have time to stay on the air, but a pretty good idea.
He said, Rush, don't sweat this business of the Senate banning torture and all that, because we'll just outsource it.
We'll use that act that Clinton created.
Or the rendition program where the CIA will get a bunch of G4s and G5s, set up a secret private airport somewhere, give the New York Times the story so they can blow the operation, and we'll fly all these terrorists to different countries that will put bamboo under their fingernails to get whatever it is that they need to know out of them.
So it's outsourcing.
It's the simple way to solve every problem in America, especially in a clandestine manner.
▲
Export Selection