All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 14, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:35
October 14, 2005, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Okay, you people, DittoCamazon at rushlimbaugh.com.
It'll be on for the remainder of the program.
We're glad to have you back.
Glad to be with you.
We are on a roll here, chugging on the fastest week in media to Friday.
We are here.
Well, I haven't received the unloading on that I was expecting today, and I invited it.
Open line Friday, you can pretty much determine what we talk about.
Monday through Thursday, I do that, but on Friday, you can.
And so I know a lot of you are mad at me over the Harriet Meyer situation.
As I said last hour, a lot of emails, not as many and not as focused a response as I got when I didn't support Perot in 92, but it's of the same tone.
It is of the same tenor.
But anyway, I mean, if you want to tell me what for, this is the day to do it.
800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
We got great audio soundbites from Calypso Louie coming up.
Calypso Louie's, what is this thing being called tomorrow?
The Million More March.
You know, tomorrow rather, is a fascinating day.
Ladies and gentlemen, tomorrow is Showdown Saturday.
This is Open Line Friday.
Tomorrow is a Saturday that will test aspirations.
It'll test hopes and dreams.
Will they reject the past and look to building a better future?
If you think I'm talking about the referendum in Iraq, you're only partially correct.
I am talking about that.
They're going to be voting on the Constitution there tomorrow.
But I'm also talking about the referendum in Washington, the Calypso Louie event in Washington, D.C., the Million More March.
I don't know if anybody else sees the parallel.
Here we have in Iraq three factions, the Shia, the Sunnis, and the Kurds.
In Washington, we have three factions, the Calypso Louis, the Reverend Jacksons, and the Reverend Sharptons.
Now, in Iraq, the Shia, the Sunnis, and the Kurds are trying to work out a brighter future.
In Washington, D.C., the three factions, the Farrakhans, the Reverend Jacksons, and the Sharptons, are trying to capitalize on the past.
We ought to take bets on where the turnout will be the highest, Iraq or Washington, D.C. My bet is that the turnout in Iraq to vote on the Constitution will be much higher than the turnout, which I think will be staggeringly low at the Million More March of Calypso Louie in Washington.
Speaking of Calypso Louis, he was on with David Asmund yesterday, the big story on Fox.
Asmund says, you know, I was reading a transcript of a speech that you gave at the National Press Club, Minister Farrakhan, where you say that this idea, the idea for this whole thing came from a vision in which you said the desire of President Reagan concerning the planning of a war involving young black men here on the soil of America.
This is what inspired me to tour the country, and this is what eventually led to the Million Men March on October 16th, 1995.
What was that vision all about?
Now, folks, I want to promise you that what you're about to hear is Calypso Louie.
It is not Paul Shanklin impersonating Calypso Louie.
This is Calypso Louie himself yesterday afternoon on the Fox News channel.
I was in a tiny village in Tepostlan in Mexico on the 17th of September 1985 and I had a vision-like experience climbing a mountain there on the top of which is a temple to the Metzo-American Christ figure Quetzalcoatl.
And one of these little UFOs came over that mountain and I was signaled from a group of persons to come and I was beamed up into that small vehicle and carried to a larger vehicle where I heard the voice of my leader and teacher, the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, saying these words to me.
In early September, the president met with his joint chiefs of staff to plan a war.
He didn't tell me who the war was against or whatnot, but later in the next, early in the next year, it came to me while I was in Ghana that this war was against Libya and Libya's leader Muammar Gaddafi.
So I went there and warned him of what was about to take place, and it did take place.
Okay, so that apparently was the inspiration for the Million Man March, which will be added on to tomorrow with a Million More March.
Little UFOs over the mountaintop.
Calypso Louie beamed up to the mothership.
And notice he talks here about the joint chiefs of staff.
And I meant to say it that way because this now explains the call that we got from Rita X all those years ago.
Mike, would it be difficult to find the call from Rita X?
We have the call from Rita X. That's a pretty long call.
How long is that call?
I mean, it's like six minutes long.
Well, let's go for it because what's the date on this call?
We're going to get that call here in just a second.
This call goes back the early 90s.
Rita X, that's what she called herself, calling from Detroit, really laying into me while praising Calypso Louie.
And she talked about him being beamed up to a mothership and that there was a mothership up there floating around and all black people eventually going to be beamed up to it.
And, you know, we thought just a typical talk radio kook.
But now we have found, after all these years, over 15 years, I'm guessing, have gone by since Rita X's first call, and we now know the basis of that call.
So we'll get to that call in the next segment.
First off, the next bite from Calypso Louie.
Now, after that, Calypso Louie just said one of these little UFOs came over that mountain and I was signaled from a group of persons to come and I was beamed up into that small vehicle and carried to a larger vehicle.
You would think Asmund said UFOs.
Could you describe the UFOs?
But no.
The next question.
Now, see, if Pat Robertson had said something like this, this has been all over the press all day today.
He would be labeled as a kook and a fanatic.
And we got to get rid of him.
This is dangerous.
Look at who the religious right are.
Calypso Louie says it and for obvious reasons, nobody can characterize it for what it is.
We just, well, he said it.
Okay, I'll go to my next question.
Next question from David Asmund was, let me just ask if I could.
You mentioned the Honorable Elijah Muhammad, who founded the nation of Islam.
He also claimed that white men were created by an evil scientist many centuries ago.
Do you agree with that?
I would like to discuss the birth of the white race.
As you know, anthropologists say that all life began in Africa.
The origin of man began in Africa.
So the red, the brown, the yellow, and the white are really children of the original.
6,000 years ago, an evil scientist named Jaakov, a black scientist, created the white man.
Is that what you believe?
I believe, sir, that all of us come from the originator of the heavens and the earth and that white people are the newest people on our planet and have been created by God to rule for a certain period of time.
And you have ruled and you have done great things and awful things in the time of your rule, but a new world is coming in and white supremacy and black inferiority will have no place.
Well, the next question after this was, Reverend Farrakhan, we have so many rumor mills at work in the world, partly because of the internet, but we're always getting wild rumors.
Why dignify a crazy hate-filled rumor like a levee's being blown up with your word and with your suggestion that it might be true when all how do you anyway?
Here's the answer.
No, all the evidence is not in, sir, unless an investigation is carried out to prove that is only a rumor.
And whether it is or is not, look at the talk that's going on today that they don't even feel that the ninth ward should be rebuilt, that it should be made into a wetland.
What will happen to the tens of thousands of persons who live there and won't be able to come back and are not being called back to clean their neighborhood up and rebuild as they were asked to rebuild in 1927?
All right.
All right.
Two things.
The guy has just got through saying that he was beamed up by UFOs into a bigger ship.
And then Asmund, and I understand why, believe me, I understand why Asmund says, why lend your credibility to the notion?
What?
Of course.
The whole thing is ridiculous.
I'm saying, you're misunderstanding me, Mr. Hurt Snurdy.
I'm telling you, here a guy has just said UFOs plucked him out of the mountaintop in Mexico, took him up to hear the words of Elijah Muhammad, where he predicted the war against Gaddafi.
And then Asmund says, why would you lend your credibility to this rumor that their levees were blown up?
Credibility?
I know what he, credibility with his flock, credibility with his audience.
But I mean this, folks, architect of the Million More March tomorrow in Washington, D.C., we have Rita X's call ready to go.
Wait.
Oh, you're going to quote.
We get a quick two-minute Rita X call.
When's this call from?
What's the date?
Oh, okay.
So 1990.
So we're going to go back 15 years.
This is Rita X in two minutes.
Let me just say this.
There is a spaceship called the Mother Plane.
Yes.
And on the mother plane, it has what is called 1,500 bombing planes.
And very soon in the 1990, a Ford closure on the UFO phenomena, which has been withheld from the public, will be exposed.
I see.
The Pentagon, NASA Space Program, the President of the United States, and the Joint Chief of Staff, both Congress and the Senator of the USA, as well as the Navy and Air Force Intelligence, FBI, and CIA will be forced.
You forgot Interpol.
You forgot Interpol.
Well, will be forced to face the nation and the mounting crisis in the air and on the land and the sea and give up the secret.
What are the secrets?
The secret is the president and his chief jointster staff are planning a secret war involving their over 40-year knowledge of an encounter with a galactic fleet, which has been called the unidentified flying saucers.
Rita, reader, hang on a minute.
Now, the chiefs of joint, as you say, the chairman of the chiefs of joint is a black man.
Colin Colonel Powell.
Colonel Colin Powell.
Colin colon colonel Powell.
It's Colonel Colin Powell.
Well, let me rephrase this.
General.
It's General Colin Powell.
It's General Colin Powell.
Because he is planning genocide on the black community as Minister Farrakhan has revealed to the masses of the people that President Bush has sat down with Colonel Colin Powell to plan genocide against the black community.
But this is why the event, the mother plane, is there, and the mother plane will destroy England.
And that's why you noticed that when the first sightings of the writing in the hedges from Stonehenge and the writing in the grass was 50 miles from what is called Stonehenges in England.
Stonehenges, yes.
The mother plane with the 1500 bombing plane would drop three baby planes, three bombs on England and destroy England.
And also she would destroy your net, your air, the air, the American air bases and her jets and everything.
So that was it.
Okay, we condensed that down for the whole six-minute call from Rita X. There were two calls, but that's the basis now for her call was Calypso Louis and the UFOs in Mexico back in 1985.
Mother plane.
Yeah, that's when she called me the head of trichinology.
And of course, one of my favorite parts of that, it's hard to pick one, is aside from the chief joints of staff, is that we were going to blow up the stonehinges.
We'll be back after this.
Showdown Saturday tomorrow.
Not to mention USC and Motre Dame.
Before we get back to the phones, Ellen DeGeneres will get a fancy tour when she takes her talk show to New York City next month.
New York Senator Hillary Rodham Rodham has agreed to show Ellen DeGeneres around New York during her Thanksgiving week visit.
Yeah, we'll go see some theater.
We'll hang out.
We'll do some stuff there.
We'll go to the clubs, DeGeneres said during Thursday's taping of her show.
Clinton has said, no, you'll go to the clubs.
DeGeneres also congratulated Clinton on her 30-year marriage to former President Bill Clinton.
Hillary said, yeah, he's the kind of person you really want to be married to for 30 years because he washes the dishes.
Yeah, well, Hillary's too bad he didn't also do the laundry back in 1998 and take care of that blue semen stained dress, huh?
Huh?
See, you can't get a good guy if he's only going to do the dishes.
Got to do the laundry, too.
Here's Jillian in Newport, Rhode Island.
Hi, Jillian.
Welcome.
Hi, I'm calling just because I have a problem with your characterization of feminism.
As you portrayed it, it's kind of the feminazi that you're talking about.
Mostly the feminism that I know of, and I consider myself a feminist, is about equal opportunity.
It's about having the choice to either be a homemaker or be a mother or be a career woman.
It doesn't involve...
Okay, hold it.
Hold it.
Hold it.
Hold it right there, Jillian.
Hold it right there.
By the way, I have to tell you, I love that name.
Thank you.
I do.
I do.
I love that name.
But, you know, you're doing what, I don't know how old you are, and I'm not asking, but you're doing what a lot of women do to try to cover the tracks because feminism is as dirty a word today as liberalism is.
When you use the word feminazi, you are describing the original feminists and what you just, there was no choice.
That was the whole point.
If you chose homemaking, if you chose motherhood, if you chose marriage and a man and your relationship was the focal point in your life, you were undercutting the sisterhood and the movement.
There was no choice.
What feminism has become by women who still want to call themselves feminists for whatever reason is what you just said, equal opportunity, the right to either have a career or stay at home and not get grief over it.
But that's the modern evolution.
That's not how it started.
In the most modern era incarnation, the late 60s, early 70s, it was not that.
There was no choice.
There was pressure brought to bear on women.
They had to follow this certain route.
And it was a way of emancipation because for all these years, men had held them down the glass ceiling.
Men had not allowed them to reach their full potential.
That's why one of the earliest clothing was equal pay for equal work.
Because it's all about equality.
We want to be equal with men.
We want to stay the same.
We want to be respected the same if you choose to be a wife.
It's also about choice for men to be okay, to be a homemaking father.
Yeah, but see, what you fail to realize is that women have always had it better than men in a lot of ways.
Now, wait a sec.
Wait a sec.
Wait a sec.
Now, hear me out on this.
I will grant you that equal pay for equal work had to have something done about it.
There's no question.
There were some inequities that were out there.
But the feminists of yore are still the feminists of today, and they're feeling like the movement has failed.
They're feeling like their movement has not succeeded because so many women are abandoning the original concepts and making the choice to stay home and making the choice to have a baby or two and making the choice to have their world center around their relationship.
That was a no-no back then.
And that's why so many women foreclose it.
It's why we have daycare centers in offices.
It's why we have all these bastardizations of human nature.
It's why daycare centers raising, you know, having your kids raised by other people.
But my comment about women having it a little easier, even today, if a man puts on his resume, after work here five years, I may want to go home and raise the kids for a couple of years.
He's never going to get hired.
A woman can take that choice.
She can take maternity leave of nine or 12 months or whatever, come back to the job that she's got.
She can choose to leave the job and then come back to it five or 10 years later after motherhood.
Father can't do that.
Man can't do that.
You've got far more options than men do in the workplace.
And you always have had with Truth Be.
Now, quick timeout, we'll be back in just a moment.
Stay with us.
Your guiding light through time of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos, despair, torture, humiliation, and even the good times.
It's Open Line Friday at 800-282-2882, and we go to Louisville, Kentucky.
Hi, Alan.
Your name.
I just said that I've listened to you for about the last three or four weeks at the request of a conservative friend and kind of going with the idea of debunking you and maybe pointing you as an ideologue, whatever it might be.
But, you know, after the last few weeks, I've discovered it's not like that.
It's quite the opposite.
And just to let you know, I'm a Democrat more in the mold of Lieberman.
I do support the war, but there were a lot of other issues I disagreed with Republicans on and come to realize I'm not sure for what particular reason.
You know, being called racist and greedy corporations and Halliburton, I've heard that issue a lot, but I've really based it on nothing other than anger or something that I felt.
I noticed myself teetering more onto the left side.
And I think there was one statement you made some time ago that kind of put into perspective for me when you said that what it must be like to be a liberal, even though I consider myself a Democrat, and I do think there are differences, but what it must be like to be angry like that and to live like that.
And I noticed I was living like that and was angry for no reason.
And it's not fun.
And, you know, losing arguments to one couple of my friends all the time either, because they said you base things on facts.
Well, I heard you make that Rumsfeld quote, how it was taken out of context and actually played the whole quote.
So it's kind of disillusioning at one point to hear how things are portrayed.
Well, how old are you?
Mind if I ask?
I'm 38.
38, and you've been a Democrat all your life?
Yeah.
And you could probably tell people why.
I mean, if they asked you your position on issue A, B, C, or D, you could probably explain your position, right?
I could explain it.
But again, a lot of the issues were not because of any real fact.
I mean, I didn't really vote until the first time until President Clinton.
If I could give you a factual reason of why I did, I probably couldn't.
I just voted because it was the thing to do to vote Democrat.
Yeah, party loyalty.
Right.
Well, what had you heard and for how long about this program and why had you resisted listening to it?
Well, you just do your thing.
You know, Rush is an ideologue.
Rush is a hitman for the conservative side.
And just a friend of mine who's a good friend, somebody that I trust, has very steadfast beliefs on the conservative side, said, just give it a chance.
Listen to him.
He's also pretty funny.
And so I did, and I did for one day and thought, well, all right, maybe I'll listen another day.
And then maybe I'll listen another day.
And, you know, I've come to find that it's actually, you know, you've got a very good sense of humor.
And I also noticed that you have some major disagreements with your president or with our president, with President Bush.
But, you know, I've heard you disagree on the border and on the Supreme Court nominee.
And it's really been based on your own beliefs, but facts to back it up.
So I think those things have become interesting.
I think I've maybe allowed myself to be influenced for reasons that I shouldn't have been influenced rather than looking at cold hard facts.
And again, I consider myself a moderate Democrat.
I'm more on the Lieberman side.
And I too, again, would like to reiterate I did support this war.
Okay.
Well, I appreciate that.
I'm also appreciative of your honesty.
Let me attempt to explain to you why you had the reaction to this show and me and probably a lot of other conservatives that you had before you were tuned into it.
This is my fervent belief.
There's been a political ideological war in this country since its founding, oftentimes between two, but sometimes more than two, three or four different parties or factions or ideologies have been battling for supremacy.
Now, the last 50 years, up until, well, up until 1980, but really even through the 80s and through Reagan, for the last 50 years, the Democrats and the liberals pretty much owned the country.
They owned the House of Representatives and they owned the media.
And that is crucial to they had a monopoly in the media.
They were able to decide what was news every day, but more importantly, they were also able to decide what didn't get reported.
And that's just as much indicative of a bias as what is reported.
And all three networks, which is all there were until cable and CNN came along in the early 80s, not all that long ago.
And the Washington Post, New York Times, and the three newsweekly magazines, pretty much, that was it.
That was the media.
And they're all the same.
It didn't matter which network you watched.
The lead stories were almost identical.
The way they were reported was almost identical.
And so along all that time during that monopoly, as is the case with all monopolists, when there's no competition, you get lazy.
And you take things for granted, which I think they did.
They took their power for granted, their monopoly for granted, and their ability to sway the hearts and minds of the American people for granted because the challenges to them always failed.
Well, Reagan gets elected in the 80s, and that starts a groundswell or continues a groundswell.
It actually got started in the 50s where conservatism is concerned.
But back in the late 80s, this program started.
It spawned other talk shows.
Fox News came along, the Blogosphere, and in 94, the Democrats lost the House.
And I think that is the trigger date for the change of behavior among liberals these days because what you found as you listen to your preferred media choices and talk to your friends, you didn't hear the ideas that we conservatives were advancing being debated successfully.
What you heard were attempts to discredit us.
Well, Limbaugh is an ideologue.
Limboy's a blowhard.
Limbaugh makes it up.
Limbaugh, just a gas bag.
Limboy, he doesn't care whether it's right or wrong.
He'll just make it up to fit his agenda.
So you hear this enough, and you don't have to listen to find out if it's true or not, because you believe it, because actually that's the side that you're on.
And what happens when you tune into this program or any other, you're going to find that ideas are discussed and the things that I believe or we believe, I can explain almost persuasively.
And you find out that all these attempts to discredit me, the racist, sexist, bigot, homophobe, you don't hear any of that when you listen.
So you're scratching your head.
And then you realize you probably weren't as far to the left as some of those people that were your friends, such as you, a Lieberman type, and you voted for the war.
And this has been a tactic that the left has used because they got fat and lazy during those 50 years.
They didn't have to debate their ideas to have them win because there was no competition.
Now that there's competition, they have a tough time debating the ideas.
In fact, a lot of liberals don't even want to admit that's what they are.
They cast themselves as moderates or what have you.
And so it's been an interesting metamorphosis that has occurred.
And I'm always excited when people like you not only do listen, but then try to call and explain the metamorphosis that you went through because it confirms partially what I've thought about the people on the Democrat side or the leftist side in terms of their inability to actually go into the arena of ideas and have a debate and prevail.
Well, I thought it would be a hard pill to have to swallow to admit it to you, but I think that the more I've listened, that I have a lot of beliefs that seem to lean more to the right than I ever would have thought possible.
And I do have to say that I've very much disagreed with the control that's being acquired by the 527 special interest groups and people like Soros that have really taken hold of the party.
And therein lies the problem with us, and that I'm willing to admit, that we're short on ideas.
And I'm tired of listening to the bickering.
I'm tired of it beyond belief.
I mean, we have to have something more to offer this country to ever win back.
But I can't even say that I would stay to the left anymore anyway, after some of the things I've heard.
I don't think it's possible to get back to party power unless there's something positive to offer.
And I haven't heard it, but it wasn't as hard a pill to swallow as I thought it would.
You know, I probably have to admit I'll continue to listen to the show because ultimately it comes down to that there's nothing wrong with the truth.
Sometimes the truth hurts, but facts are facts and I'm just going to have to listen for that and see what happens in the future.
Well, I appreciate that.
I'm going to you use a computer.
I'm actually at my office.
I don't keep one at home.
I'm at my office right now at my desk.
I'm going to siltra, but I don't have one at home.
Are you free to use your computer at the office as you wish, or is it only for all?
Well, I'll tell you what I'm going to do.
If you'll hang on here, I'm going to, a nice man will pick up the phone and we'll get some information from you.
If you want to be, you don't have to, but we'll make you a complimentary subscriber at Rush 24-7, the website, for one year.
No obligation on your part to do anything.
You can just go there and check it out on a daily basis.
And you'll find there that everything said on this program is backed up.
Transcripts are there.
Links to the stories which give us the evidence that we use to make our points.
It's all there.
Plus a virtual encyclopedia of the past, things called the essential stack of stuff, which is basically just a huge encyclopedic wealth of knowledge that form essentially the core principal conservatives' views in news form and excerpts from this show and so forth.
I think you'll find it fascinating, and I hope you do.
And I appreciate the call so much.
We will take a break and be back in just a second and roll right on with Open Line Friday.
Sit tight.
All right, standby, folks.
A couple more great examples of the media staging things as opposed to their attempt to say that Bush's teleconference with soldiers yesterday was staged.
And one of them took place on the Today Show this morning.
Have you heard about this?
This is fabulous.
But first, I want to get this call from Chicago.
This is Atia, and it's great that you called.
Welcome.
Hello.
Yes.
Hi, you're on the air.
Big show biz break here.
Hi, Rush.
Oh, my gosh.
It is an honor to speak with you, Mega Dittos.
Thank you.
Yes, I would like to ask you more about the comment you made about Bono earlier this week.
Wait, wait, wait, wait, just ask you a question first.
Did you hear me make the comment or have you read about it?
No, no.
I heard you make this comment.
Okay, well, then you heard me retract it.
I did not.
I read the retraction.
Well, the retraction occurred within minutes.
Where did you read the retraction?
I read the retraction online at a few actual YouTube websites.
Well, I'm glad they got it because every media outlet that's written about this, and I have asked them, hey, you left out the fact I retracted this, has refused to print the retraction.
So it's still out there as though I said it.
Then I retracted it two to three minutes after I'd said it, after maybe even less time than that.
I apologize.
I did not hear the retraction.
Yeah.
Well, now tell me the truth.
There's no wrong answer here.
Did you actually read about the retraction or did you call here thinking that it had not been retracted?
No, no, I did read the retraction and I believe that you did retract it.
Because you are so good.
When you make a mistake, you always do admit it.
Yes.
And I don't wait until the next day at the end of the show to admit the mistake.
No, I know.
We do our corrections prominently on this program.
We don't want to get anywhere by being wrong.
I know.
I know.
But I don't believe that you would have said that if you didn't know something because you are always telling the truth and you do know so much.
So when you said that, I was just, first of all, I couldn't believe, because you were talking about it like it was common knowledge.
I thought it was.
I'm sorry.
Otherwise, I wouldn't have.
But the person, and there's actually more than one, but there's a person that look at.
Yes.
I'm sorry, this has been my first time.
I'm trying not to compound this, Atia.
You know, you're already upset that I said it.
I'm not trying to say it again.
And I don't want to say it.
I'm just telling you that I retracted this based on a note from one of the people who had mentioned this to me and said that was just speculation.
I said, okay, thanks for telling me it was speculation years ago when you told me it was true.
So I retracted it because I don't know it personally to be true.
Okay.
And so this is, I got caught in the whole thing about using unidentified sources.
My sources are not unidentified.
I know them.
But I got caught up here and you're exactly right.
I just assumed, hey, it's rock and roll.
But I don't know it, and I retracted it within minutes.
And I feel bad about it.
I feel terrible about it, Atiya.
I worried about this all night long.
I don't like saying things about people aren't true.
And Rush, that's the thing.
I mean, if you say it is the sun that shines at night, I know that.
No, no, no, don't, whatever you do.
Okay, okay, okay.
You know what?
I won't go that far.
But, you know, usually you are just so spot on.
So when I heard you say this, as upset as I was, and I was a bit upset, I really thought that you knew something that we did not know.
Well, I don't.
I personally don't know anything that you don't know about this.
You know more about Bono than I do because you're, obviously, you go to the website's a fan and all that.
So you know more about Bono than I do.
I was just making sure.
Pardon me?
I said I was just making sure, sir.
Okay.
All right.
I'm glad for the chance to clear this up because I asked, there have been a whole bunch of print media people that picked this up.
Do you not even remember what this was about?
So everybody picked up the original.
Ooh, it's all over the place.
It was in page six.
And then once it's in page six, it's over with.
It's picked up around the world.
So, you know, I asked for a, you know, hey, you know, you left out the fact I retracted this.
And they said, well, we just, we don't want to, we don't want to continue the story.
I said, okay, fine.
So I'm sitting here.
And that's why when Atia called, okay, good.
Here's a chance to bring this up and clarify this.
Because, you know, it's the same old thing.
What happens on this program is such a mystery to the people who write about it.
And it's not hard to listen to the program.
It's called radio.
Turn to the station that carries the program and listen.
And you know what happens here.
But what happens is that people who write about this program oftentimes don't ever listen to it and they hear second or third hand something that was said.
Bamo.
Just run with it.
But Atia, I don't know it, and I shouldn't have said it on that basis.
But as soon as I found that out, bam, as soon as I could, I made the correction and withdrew the statement.
I'm glad you called a quick timeout, folks.
Open Line Friday rolls on in whatever direction it takes us after this.
All right.
Today's show.
They really got caught today, folks, in a deliciously ironic twist of fate shortly before airing a segment aimed at embarrassing the Bush administration by suggesting it had staged a video conversation between the president and these soldiers in Iraq.
The Today Show was caught staging a video stunt.
What happened was they put a reporter, Michelle Robinson, out in floodwaters in New Jersey, and they put her in a canoe.
And they put her out there in a canoe to illustrate it was so bad.
The floodwaters are ravaging New Jersey and the waters are high.
And she had to be out there in a canoe.
But in the middle of her report, two guys happened to walk by her in the canoe in water up to their mid-calves.
Staging anyone?
Did I got the still-shot picture?
Maybe the water's no higher than her ankles.
And she's in her canoe reporting as these two guys walk in front of her.
Staging anyone?
We'll be back.
▲
Export Selection