All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 13, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:34
October 13, 2005, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Is Carl Rove out on parole yet?
Somebody, somebody let me know.
Um, I mean, I he hasn't been in jail, he hasn't been found guilty, hasn't been charged, he hasn't even been tried, but if you listen to the media, you'd think that Rove had been in jail so long and be up for parole by now.
Once again, they're not reporting the news, they're creating it.
Greetings, welcome.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
And uh looking forward to talking to you as always.
This is Thursday, right?
We are just zipping through the busy broadcast week.
And uh this is the fastest three hours in media, so that's understandable.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, 800-282-2882, and the email address rush at EIB net.com.
All right, Mike, grab cut two first.
I just, you know, yesterday on this program, we um we talked about Dr. Dobson's radio show in which he explained what Carl Rove had told him about the Harriet Myers nomination.
I want to go back.
I want to play you a uh uh the comment that I made and play it in f you know in full so that you have it in context, and I want to show you what ABC's World News Tonight did with it yesterday.
Here first off is me from yesterday's program.
What Dobson says that Rove told him that he shouldn't have told him was that a number of other it had to be a woman.
And the first thing was the nominee had to be a woman, i.e.
quota.
Second thing was uh Rove told Dobson that very few of the qualified female nominees accepted the nomination.
They weren't interested in it.
All right, that's what I said about it.
Now listen to this report from Terry Moran, ABC's World News Tonight last night.
The faith-based pitch may not be working.
Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh citing a report that Mr. Bush was determined to nominate a woman once again today blasted the White House.
It had to be a woman, and the first thing that was the nominee had to be a woman, i.e.
quota.
Okay, so the idea you get from this short bite is that that I was speaking out against Myers because she was a woman.
And all I was doing was telling you what Dobson uh reported that Rove told him.
I mean it.
This is classic.
Uh it's it's it's it's and I it's more that an object lesson or uh an illustration.
I mean, I'm not offended by it.
It's it's it's become a it's it's it's part of the way things happen now.
But given the chance to expose it to you, I wanted to show listen to these two again so that you'll now see hear what I say.
I'm clearly referencing what uh Jim Dobson says that Carl Rove told him that ABC pulls one sentence out of this and makes it sound like I am against Harriet Myers because she's a woman.
I've said exact opposite in tackling all these criticisms that uh conservatives are sexist uh and and are opposing Myers because she's a woman.
That's absolutely silly, as you know.
We've supported here Janice Rogers Brown and Edith Jones and Priscilla Owen and a number of others.
It's just absolutely uh silly.
Um you know the thing that amazes me is this program does not require a super decoder ring or a code in order to listen to it.
You just have to turn on radio.
And barring that, all you have to do is go to my website.
And yet, uh somewhere this program gets posted, gets taken out of context.
These news media use that place as a source authority and think they have a story.
So here's the whole thing again, just to illustrate.
What Dobson says that Rove told him that he shouldn't have told him was that a number of other it had to be a woman.
And the first thing was the nominee had to be a woman, i.e., quota.
Second thing was uh Rove told Dobson that very few of the qualified female nominees accepted the nomination.
They weren't interested in it.
And here's again how this sounded on the ABC World News Tonight last night.
The faith-based pitch may not be working.
Radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh citing a report that Mr. Bush was determined to nominate a woman once again today blasted the White House.
It had to be a woman, and the first thing that was the nominee had to be a woman, i.e.
quota.
Uh Mr. Moran, you gotta you gotta work harder than this.
This is uh this is embarrassing for you.
I mean, it's it's when I can when I can nuke your whole report this easily.
Uh but this is this is what's happening.
You see, the press is is uh is getting all giddy about this.
And in order to slime conservatives, take us out of context and so forth and so on.
The latest on Harriet Myers, uh Matt Drudge posted it on his website about 40 minutes ago, starting at 1130, and it is an exclusive.
He writes that the Drudge Report has obtained a copy of sworn testimony given by Harriet Myers in 1990, in which she said that she wouldn't belong to the Federalist Society, which is a group of uh conservative and libertarian lawyers, because it was politically charged.
But she did not include in that category the NAACP and other liberal groups according to the transcript.
Now, this uh these transcripts have been requested from the White House by a number of people and they've been denied.
Uh there's a renegade somewhere that has released these.
There's a there's a renegade that's uh obviously uh some somewhere uh in in the in the pro-Bush camp, there's a renegade that's let these things get released somehow.
This is uh this is this is jet fuel on a fire here, folks.
Here's uh here's what Drudge has posted.
Word of the testimony circulated late last week, royaling conservatives, and it was a night ridder story, and even talked about it on this program.
But what nobody had was the actual transcript at the time.
Uh it set off a scramble among lawyers to obtain the actual testimony.
Sources uh tell a drudge report that conservatives demanded the White House and its allies release copies of the testimony, but their demands were ignored.
A source close to the Bush administration says the process requires the White House to prepare documents to turn over to the Judiciary Committee.
Only after the committee has had the courtesy of receiving them, are such documents made public.
What this is about is Myers testified in a voting rights lawsuit, claiming that the Dallas Dallas City Council had too few black and Hispanic members.
So not only did Harriet Myers testify that she would not join the politically charged Federalist Society, she also testified that she had joined a liberal organization, the Democratic Progressive Voters League.
Drudge has links to all of this.
Uh she was asked whether she considered the NAACP to be in the category of organizations she considered to be politically charged, and her answer is no, I don't.
Now, this is admittedly back in 1990, and as a reminder, the IRS has threatened to revoke the NAACP's tax exempt status after the group's chairman Julian Bond condemned the Bush administration and its policies on education, the economy, and the war in Iraq during a speech last summer.
And then the full transcript of the testimony follows uh and it's it's uh it's redirect examination.
Uh Ms. Myers, are you a member of any predominantly minority organization such as the NWCP, the Black Chamber of Commerce, Urban League, or any other predominantly minority organization?
Uh women minorities, she asked.
Well, maybe predominantly racial and ethnic minorities.
Answer, no.
Question in your capacity as an at-large member, do you think being involved in such organizations might assist you in having a perspective that bring a perspective to your job that you don't have?
Answer.
I attend meetings designed to give me that input.
However, I've tried to avoid memberships in organizations that were politically charged with one viewpoint or the other.
For example, I wouldn't belong to the Federalist Society any more than I feel it's just it it's better not to be involved in organizations that seem to color your view one way or the other for people who are examining you.
I did join the Progressive Voters League here in Dallas during the campaign as part of the uh part of the campaign.
Well, are you active in the PVL now?
Do you intend to be?
No, I am not.
Do you think the NAACP and Black Chamber of Commerce are in the category of organizations politically charged that you were talking about?
No, I don't.
This was a trial of Roy Williams et al versus the City of Dallas uh September 11th, 1989.
So uh that's that's the latest to hit, and it's gonna, it's it's gonna it's gonna ignite the flames.
We got lots to do on the program today here, folks.
Just sit tight.
We'll come back and get started with all the rest of today's program after this.
Hi, welcome back.
Great to have you, America's Anchorman.
America's truth detector, documented to be almost always right, 98.5% of the time here at the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
All right, folks, the left is out there salivating over what is happening in the conservative world over the Harriet Myers nomination.
Two things here.
Robin Toner piece in the New York Times today and uh Howard Feynman column entitled The Conservative Crack Up.
Uh subhead is how the Neocons have developed a political exit strategy.
And and I just know that Howard was sitting there drooling over his keyboard as he was typing this piece.
And remember, Feynman had a piece recently that was two years late in discovering the influence that the extremist left-wing bloggers have on the mainstream Democratic Party.
This is a piece that is steeped in hope.
Uh, and it's it I think it it grossly, well, it's just it's full of just wrong analysis, this incorrect analysis.
But let me just say this before we get into it in great detail.
What is happening here, and I've tried to say this over and over a number of times this week and last week, what is happening here is not a conservative crack up.
What is happening is a conservative crackdown.
And there's a huge difference.
There's a conservative crackdown going on here.
This is rooted in optimism.
This is rooted in being the best.
This is rooted in doing the right thing.
This is not rooted in pessimism or defeatism or selling out or oh, whoa is us, this always happens to us.
Some guy wrote a piece, I don't remember his name right now, but wrote a piece for human events, and he advocates a theory.
He says the mainstream blue-blood country club Republicans treat conservatives the same way the Democratic Party treats blacks.
They whine and dynam and promise the moon during campaigns, but when it's time to govern, they ignore us.
At some point, that was uh an analogy that that might have had some weight.
The problem is the conservative movement is the Republican Party today at the grassroots.
And you know, I had a great interview yesterday for my next issue of the newsletter with Mike Pence, Congressman from Indiana, uh, about the efforts in the House of Representatives to tow the line on spending and to finally get something done on set-asides so that we don't break the bank, start borrowing more money for whatever disaster relief comes up after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita and flooding up in New Hampshire and all the rain that's going on in the Northeast right now.
It was very uplifting to listen to him talk about that.
Can I tell you one thing he told me?
Just one thing, I don't want to give the whole thing away, but he said that to this day what remains one of the most powerful influences on members of Congress outside of this program, of course, is legitimately made and legitimately written, phone calls and letters from the same zip code of the district of the congressman.
He says you would be surprised at the number of congressmen who wanted no part of cutting the budget, they wanted no part of sounding uh uh like they were going against the grain here to reduce spending.
But then when their constituents started telling them that they wanted them uh these congressmen to get on board, some of them came to Mike Pence, say, you know, I I want to hear more about what you're doing.
I might want to join your effort here.
It's what I've always said.
You inform the people and you get them educated, get them participating, as you people do, and that's the way things happen.
You know, the the we the the we we want a triumph here that's based on the triumph of ideas.
The triumph of ideas in the minds and hearts of voters.
That gives it legitimacy, and that creates mandates and majorities that are that are real.
Uh uh not not via spin and fakery and so forth, which is what the left is into.
So right now, as and and you can see uh by what happened with the ABC World News Tonight report last night, take me out of context, make it sound like I'm anti-female, and that's why I'm opposing Harriet Myers.
When I was even talking about me, I was talking about what Jim Dobson says that Carl Rove told him.
This is what the left is doing.
They're salivating.
They have they've got Carl Rove in jail.
They've got Scooter Libby in jail, they uh they've got the conservatives cracking up, they have the conservative movement falling apart.
It's over, according to Feynman.
Here in the New York Times, the headline is Democrats see Dream of 06 victory taking form.
Suddenly, Democrats see a possibility in 2006 that uh they have long dreamed of, a sweeping midterm election framed around what they describe as the simple choice of change with the Democrats or more of an unpopular status quo with the Republican majority.
I want to remind you they thought the same thing in 2002 and they thought the same thing in 2004.
That sense of political opportunity has Democratic operatives scrambling to recruit more candidates in congressional districts that look newly favorable for Democratic gains to overcome internal divisions, produce an agenda they can carry into 2006 to raise the money to compete across a broader field.
In short, the Democrats are trying to be ready if in fact an anti-incumbent 1994 style political wave hits.
So they think that 1994 is about to be repeated and this is one of their big problems.
They never look forward they always look backwards.
They're always looking into the rear view mirror in their old playbook to find out how things are going to happen as they once did.
And they continue to miss the importance of what it was that caused 1994 to take place and they will not they will not factor in the fact that most people in this country at that point in time were fed up with the Clinton administration policy of trying to nationalize health care.
There was all kinds of scandal with the House bank and and this sort of thing and the Democrats think and the post office Democrats think that they have recreated that culture of corruption and they keep talking about that and just because they say it they believe it they think they've already sold that to a majority of the American voters.
For example, already the response to Hurricane Katrina, the war in Iraq and soaring gasoline prices have taken a toll on the popularity of President Bush and congressional Republicans new polling by the Pew Research Center shows that the approval rating for congressional Republican leaders at 32% with 52% disapproving a sharp deterioration since March.
The ratings of Democratic leaders stood at 32% approval 48% disapproval.
This is margin of error stuff it doesn't show them having gained anything there may be problems in the Republican world here, but there aren't any gains being made by the Republicans and that's what Jim Carville has been running around trying to tell these people.
You know you can sit there and wail and moan and complain all you want but you're not advancing yourselves at all you're just watching the other guys what you think is destroy themselves and and that is not what is happening here.
But for Democrats to step into the void many strategists and elected officials say they must offer more than a blistering critique of the Republicans in power the regular attacks on what Democrats now describe as a culture of cronyism and cor oh I see it's now three C's CCC, the culture of cronyism and corruption.
Why not just put a P after it and make an and use the Russian hammer and sickle and adopt it as their own logo for the Democratic Party the CCCP that can revive the long lost Soviet Union which they so terribly and desperately miss.
Culture of cronyism and corruption yeah okay just put just put a P in there I'll come up with a word for it here in just a second what they need many Democrats acknowledge is their own version of the contract with America the Republican agenda tax cuts balanced budget stronger military and an array of internal reforms that the party campaign on in the 1994 landslide election when it won control of the House and the the Senate Chuck Schumer said I think Democrats understand we have a great opportunity here.
We've gotten much better at blocking some of the bad things Republicans would do but we know you can't be a party of long-term majorities unless you put forward the things that you would do Charlie Cook, the influential nonpartisan analyst of congressional elections said right now if I had to bet uh would the Democrats take the House and Senate back I'd say no but are the odds a heck of a lot better than they were three months ago or six months ago?
Heck yes.
Give you a little reality spin on this there are 435 seats in the House of Representatives and all of these districts out there in the States you've heard the term garrymandering What has happened here and this happens whenever the majority whoever the majority is every 10 years you rewrite the districts and so forth you know how many of these 435 seats in the House are competitive?
At most 20 that that is and by the way a lot of that is thanks to campaign finance reform, the incumbent protection act of whenever year it was authored 20 seats in the House 20 out of 435 may be competitive and and the Democrats would have to win almost all of them to get their majority back.
And what they're thinking is that the number of competitive seats is now on the rise because there is so much anger and sadness and distrust at the Republicans.
Well, if you go back to look at all these things, the response to Hurricane Katrina, the war in Iraq, and soaring gasoline prices, none of these things were ever as bad as they were portrayed.
And that is becoming more and more known as the days pass.
We will continue on this uh same tax it type back in just a moment.
Yes, a man, a legend, a way of life.
Here we are on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
Great to have you with us.
All right, let's let's move on here to Howard Feynman, who um, as I say, no doubt drooling over the uh the conservative crack up that he writes about.
And again, I remind you folks, what you're watching here is a conservative crackdown.
You're watching a fired up conservative base.
You're watching a motivated and inspired conservative base.
These guys are just sitting there and hoping and praying so much that this crack up is real that they're writing about it as though it is.
President George W. Bush may have no military exit strategy for Iraq, but the neocons who convinced him to go to war there have developed one of their own, a political one, blame the administration.
Their neo-Wilsonian theory is correct, they insist, but the execution was botched by a Bush team that's turned out to be incompetent, crony filled, corrupt, unimaginative, and weak over a wide range of issues.
Now, this first this lead here is based on the fact that the weekly standard, that's who the neocons are.
The weekly standard and Charles Crowdhammer and a number of other conservatives are the ones that convinced Bush to go to war in Iraq.
Bush didn't come up with the idea on his own.
Bush was sitting there minding his own business, reading a book on GOATs or whatever, and here came the weekly standard of the neocons that told him to go to war, and Bush said, okay, because when the neocons snap their fingers, I go to war.
And now the neocons are all upset, and so Bush doesn't know how to get out of it, but the neocons are going to get out of it by blaming him, because they're not going to take the hit.
Now, folks, this this is this is symptomatic of inside the beltway culture.
These people all think that they influence presidents and cause policy uh directions to change or even make policy.
And they live in this dream world that they run the country, but they never have to run for office or get elected.
They are permanently appointed the media party.
And then there are conservatives who have this view of themselves as well, uh, in certain circles.
Uh and and it it just it it flavors and shades virtually everything they write.
The flight of the neocons, just read a recent weekly standard to see what I'm talking about, is all one of only many indications that the long-predicted conservative crack up is at hand.
I'm gonna talk about the Iraq in a second, because you know what?
They're gonna vote on the Constitution Saturday.
And there's an interesting piece I'm gonna share with you by a man from North Carolina named John Armour, who draws a direct parallel to what's happened in the fight for the Iraqi Constitution with what happened in the fight for ours.
And he he points out that what happened this week in order to get this constitution to a vote on Saturday is exactly the same kind of thing that James Madison did in putting together the U.S. Constitution.
I'll share all this with you, but that that's that is going to equal good news out of uh out of Iraq.
We have this letter from uh Al-Zawahhiri to um Abu Mousab Zarkawi, and by the way, the Al-Qaeda people in Iraq now saying it's a fake.
This was predictable too.
The next thing we know, Carl Rove wrote it and sent it over there to distract attention here from the grand jury investigation.
They're saying the letter is fake.
But it's just like it's just like the Hurricane Katrina was not nearly as bad as it was reported.
The aftermath was not nearly as bad.
Uh the media got everything about this hurricane wrong from before it hit, after it hit three weeks in the aftermath.
Nothing they wrote about this hurricane was right, and yet they're out there celebrating themselves as doing some of the finest work they've ever done, giving themselves awards, giving themselves plaudits and pats on the back.
It's laughable.
Now here they come describing our crackup.
And now they've they actually think that the weekly standard's responsible for the war in Iraq, but the weekly standard doesn't have the guts to stand up and take the hit, so they're gonna blame Bush for it.
The movement that began 50 years ago with the founding of Bill Buckley's National Review that had its coming of age in the Reagan years that reached its zenith with Bush's victory in 2000 is falling apart at the seams.
He wishes wait till you hear some of the analysis in this piece.
In 1973, Carl Rove met George W. Bush and became the R2 D2 and Luke Skywalker of Republican politics.
At first neither was plugged into the force the conservative movement but over the years they learned how to use the force's power by the time Bush was in his second term as governor laying the groundwork for his presidential run he and Rove, R2 D2, had gathered all of the often competing and sometimes contradictory strains of conservatism into one light beam.
You could tell by the people they brought to Austin to tie down the religious conservatives they nudged John Ashcroft out of the race and conducted a literal laying on of hands at the governor's mansion with leaders such as James Dobson.
For the libertarian anti-tax crowd they brought in certified supply sider Larry Lindsay as the top economic advisor.
For the traditional warhawks they brought in Paul Wolfowitz among others to get Bush up to speed in the world.
For the traditional corporate types well Bush had that had that taken care of on his own but now all the constituent parts are for various reasons going their own way.
Here is a checklist all right well let's take this item by item.
So Bush and Rove never were conservative but they realized they're going to have to once again fool the conservatives into thinking they were so they brought in people that they really didn't believe in, but that they knew would placate people.
So they brought in Larry Lindsey, a certified supply center.
They brought in Wolfowitz just to get the pro-war crowd, the national neocon movement.
Bush, he already had these corporate people nailed down.
That was easy.
And to tie down the religious conservatives, they nudged John Ashcroft out of the race and conducted a literal laying on of hands at the governor's mansion with leaders such as James Dobson.
So the point of this is that Bush and Roe were never conservative, but they knew they couldn't get anywhere without the conservatives so this was the window dressing to fool conservatives item by item he says the religious conservatives Harriet Meyer's nomination was the final insult religious conservatives have an inferiority complex in the Republican Party.
In an interesting way it's the same attitude that many African Americans have had toward the Democratic Party over the years.
They think that the big boys want their votes but not their presence or their full participation what really frosts the religious types is that Bush evidently feels he can only satisfy them by stealth by nominating someone with absolutely no paper trail.
It's an affront and even though Dr. Dobson's on board having been conjoled aboard by Rove, I don't sense that there's much enthusiasm for the Enterprise in Dobson's office.
I expect that any GOP 2008 hopeful who wants evangelical support like Brownbach or Santorum maybe even George Allen will vote against Meyer's confirmation in the Senate.
What's wrong with this whole thing?
What's wrong with this whole analysis of religious conservatives well the primary thing is that they're not frosted.
The religious conservatives are full force behind Harriet Myers.
The religious conservatives are not angry about anything being stealth I'm talking to religious conservatives on this on this program if they're angry at anybody it's people like me they're angry at what they think are the elitist inside the Bellway conservative intellectuals they're not mad at Bush the idea Howard how can you miss this how in the world can you miss it?
He must think that everybody in the Republican Party is a religious right conservative wacko, and that all those people who oppose Myers are no different than the religious right anywhere else.
You know, they fear the religious right on the left.
They fear conservatives, and with good reason.
And this fear has caused them to construct a view of religious conservatives as just dangerous knucklehead, hayseed, NASCAR hicks.
And you can't talk to those people.
You can't reason with those people.
And even Bush knows that.
But these people are smarter than we knew because they recognize now that Bush didn't really mean it.
He's just, there's nothing stealth about this as far as it.
Bush even said yesterday that her religious views played a role.
He's, he's, I'm at a loss to understand how somebody with as great a reputation as Howard Fineman had can so miss who is not supporting the Harriet Myers nomination who is.
If it weren't for the religious right, the nomination would already be dead.
If I may be honest, the religious right is who's saving it.
He thinks they're killing it.
Nuff said.
Corporate CEOs is the next item of support Bush is losing.
For them, Bush's handling of Katrina was and remains a mortal embarrassment to their class, which Bush is supposed to have represented, at least to some extent.
These are the people...
who believe in the faith of management in anticipating problems and moving mass organizations.
They also like to think of themselves as having a social conscience and even if they don't they are sensitive to world opinion the vivid images from the super zone superdome are just too much for these folks recently a prominent Republican businessman whom I saw in a typical CEO haunt astonished me with the severity of his tax on Bush's competence and Bush had appointed this guy to a major position.
It's amazing Howard you're missing this one too CEOs upset with Bush over Katrina the pictures from the Superdome all those things that those were lies.
Howard, all those things that went on, we now know why people didn't go in there, because there were reports in the media of mass murder, rape, and anarchy, people with guns firing them into the air, relief workers.
And these CEOs know this.
And this, you know, for them, Bush's handling of Katrina was and remains a mortal embarrassment to their class, meaning their class of existence, not their style.
But, like, you have the CEO class, then you have the upper middle class, you have the middle class.
It's an economic and social designation that he's talking about.
And he claims that they're all embarrassed about this and are peeling away.
With one anecdote, a prominent Republican businessman whom I saw in a typical CEO haunt, what the hell is that?
What does a typical CEO haunt?
A golf course?
A hunting club?
A restaurant on the top floor of the tallest building in town?
What is it?
Astonished me with the severity of his attacks on Bush's competence, and Bush had appointed this guy to a major position.
Well, had appointed.
Obviously, he's not there now.
Wonder who this could be and why he might be upset.
Main Street.
Smaller government deficit hawks.
This is an old-fashioned but important core of conservatism.
People who think federal spending should be repurposed.
relentlessly reduced and that we should always view with suspicion any proposals to increase the role of the federal government in local and private life after binges of spending and legislating backbenchers in a GOP especially in the House are in open revolt having gathered around Mike Pence of Indiana and Senator McCain.
They tend to view the leadership's spending habits with alarm.
And he goes on to talk about the isolationists and the neocons and all these other groups that are that are pulling out and the supply siders he said this is the one faction the president has yet to disappoint in a major way because he pushed through two major tax cuts is pushing more targeted ones in the wake of Katrina.
Well, this, again, he describes as the conservative crack-up.
And what this is is a conservative crackdown.
And the thing that spurred all of this is not Katrina response.
It's not Iraq and all that.
It is the Harriet Meyers nomination.
That's where the real divisions have finally opened up and split.
But this crackdown is simply all these groups essentially saying, saying we're not going to put up with this kind of thing anymore and we're going to unite and we're gonna make that we're gonna we're gonna finally produce what we want.
I just want to remind you the last time this happened, it led to two landslides in 1980 and 1984.
The uh the this is a hope and dream that the conservative movement is cracking up, and I am here to tell you it isn't.
And I hate to keep overusing this, but it is cracking down, folks.
It's cracking down and going it it's it's it's letting people who have uh gone astray know that they've gone astray one way or the other, and uh we're gonna put it back together.
I'm a little long on this segment, short on time in the next one, so bear with me.
Be back in just a second.
Stay with us.
You know, I want to go back to this uh Feynman piece where he says that the one of the groups that's uh deserting the conservative movement, i.e.
the president is uh is CEOs.
And he's got this one anecdote with one disgruntled ex-Bush appointee who's a CEO, and that establishes the case.
Now everybody knows that all CEOs do not vote Republican.
This is one of the biggest myths in American politics, that big business is pro-republican.
Most big business give equally to both parties to cover their bets because it's an extortion racket.
Look at Microsoft, they learn the lesson.
You don't give enough to the Democrats when we get in power, we'll sue you.
Antitrust and all that.
Bill Gates has opened an office in Washington, I think now, that to deal with this.
He didn't have one before that.
Um the idea that CEOs are monolithic and always Republican and are fed up is silly.
Look at the Hollywood left CEOs.
There's any CEOs out there that are liberals and left-wing.
You'd it it's it would stun you.
But then the further notion that that they are embarrassed because of the response to Hurricane Katrina, most of the CEOs I know already think the federal government's too big.
They couldn't manage it if they ran it.
It was not something that can be managed.
We've added layers and layers of bureaucracy, which CEOs do not do.
Uh and and to sit here and say that that the the I mean they don't trust it anyway.
They they they they much rather have themselves in on the action working on this, cleaning this up, to say they're embarrassed.
It's just this is such asinine analysis.
It is it it's so sophomoric given who's engaging in it.
And you say, okay, well, what's causing this?
What what is what what's really lighting the fires of the left?
It has to be the falling poll numbers, and it has to be what they think is dissension in the ranks over the Harriet Myers nomination.
Those two things have got them all fired up on the left.
Democratic Party and the media, it's ours.
We own it.
Oh, six, oh eight ours.
Well, the people at the Power Line blog have uh done some interesting research, actually uh real clear politics uh and and power line.
Bush's uh average is his approval disapproval average right now, 41%, uh 41.7% approval at this point.
And Power Line says uh are they really that bad?
Uh that is, at her about the low point in nearly five years in office.
How does it compare to other presidents' lowest poll ratings?
Actually, it isn't that bad.
Here are the low approval ratings for the last seven presidents.
Johnson, 35%.
Remember now, Bush at 41.7.
Nixon, 24%, Ford 37, Carter 28%, Reagan 35.
Bush won 29, Bill Clinton, 37%.
That and you heard right.
Every president since 1963 has had approval ratings at one time or another during his administration at least five points lower than Bush's current low point.
Bush has a higher low point approval rating than any of the seven previous presidents that I mentioned.
Now you don't see Howard Feynman remembering Bill Clinton's 37% or Jimmy Carter's 28% or Ronald Reagan's 35%, do you?
No, because none of that matters.
Because Bush is the worst as there ever been.
Bush, horrible, Bush stinks, Rumsfeld stinks, rice stinks, everybody stinks, and we're finally gonna get rid of them.
Thanks to the conservative crack up, which again, folks, is a crackdown.
Back in just a moment.
You know, it's it's this obvious.
Liberals have never understood conservatives.
They're incapable of it.
They never will understand conservatives.
They have no idea how solid the conservative base is out there, and how organized it is to continue to defeat the left, regardless what's going on amongst ourselves.
We are that unified, and we shall remain so.
▲
Export Selection