All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 2, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:42
November 2, 2005, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
America's Anchorman is back.
Whatever liberal news you just got through listening to, don't sweat it, folks, because we're here.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, this, a program that meets and surpasses all audience expectations on a daily basis.
You want to be on the program, and I can understand that you would like to be.
Number is 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
I want to grab a phone call here because we have a soldier on the phone from Davenport, Iowa, who I happen, when I was in Afghanistan, he was there.
And when I went to Kandahar, he was in the audience.
And I'll never forget that.
This is Jeff in Davenport, Iowa.
Jeff, welcome.
It's great to have you on the program.
Oh, thank you, Rush.
Meghados to you, sir.
You are a great American, and please don't ever stop what you're doing for us.
You know, I first of all wanted to thank you for coming out there to Kandahar.
I was actually stationed at a little fire base in a place called Lasker Ga, but I was able to be in Kandahar when you got there.
We knew a few days ahead, and I was able to get on a chopper and get out there.
And you have no idea how much that meant to us, sir.
So thank you very much for that.
You know, it's the other way around.
You know, I wanted to do this trip specifically to be able to talk to you people over there.
All of you, I was going to say you guys, but there were a lot of women in the audience as well.
And the number of people trooping in the rec haul there, and that's a nice recall at Kandahar, by the way.
Yeah, it is.
I mean, that was a very, very nice recall.
Popcorn machine was going and everything.
But crowd got bigger and bigger and bigger.
And I remember when the Q ⁇ A started, I must have gone an hour and a half.
That must have been an hour and a half long.
And then there was the anybody that wanted photographs or that sort of thing stayed for it.
Mary Madeline was there.
And it was just fabulous.
And the thing that was meaningful to me, and I remember saying this to you guys and you people in that group, that as I get older, I have a...
How old are you?
I'm 44, sir.
You're 44.
And how long have you been in?
I volunteered in 2002.
So are you reserves, or are you...
I am.
I'm National Guard, sir.
National Guard.
So, well, you volunteered to go over in 2002.
The older I get.
See, I had the chance.
I was 18, 19 in the late 60s, and I didn't do what you did.
And I had a chance, and I didn't.
And as I've gotten older, I have my awe for people who do what you do continues to grow.
And the older, the more mature I get, the more solemn is my appreciation for what people like you do.
Because it's all volunteer, be it guard, be it, you know, whatever else.
There is no conscription.
There's no draft.
And you volunteered to be over there.
And I came back and I told people I don't want to hear any more talk about poverty in this country.
I don't want to hear anymore about how hard our lives are, how tough we have it.
Because the circumstances I saw in that country and the Kandahar base is a pretty nice base.
It's a big base, but it's not home.
You know what, Rush, people have absolutely no idea whatsoever.
And I just, I can't tell you how badly it hurts me and the people I was over there with to see us used as pawns right now by the Democrats.
I mean, it's unbelievable.
We are doing so much good over there.
And it just seems like absolutely none of it's reported.
You know, I'm a medical sergeant, and I went on many, many, many missions to provide care in remote villages, places where they'd never seen doctors.
They'd never had medicines.
We did so much good over there.
And I gave up 18 months with my own children.
I have four kids to serve in that mission.
And I volunteered to go because it was the right thing to do, period.
And because I love my country and what we have so much that I wanted to give some of that away to those people over there.
But I cannot tell you that there was no way for them to prepare us for what we saw over there.
It is poverty on a level that is just unbelievable.
People really cannot comprehend it.
It's unreal.
Not only that, by our standards, yeah, it's poverty, but to them, it's their way of life.
They've never known anything better, and they very much appreciate your presence and our presence there.
Hope that we don't leave heard that everywhere I went from Afghanistan people.
But anyway, I'll never forget that it was, we got there like three or four in the afternoon, and we're running really close on our schedule.
And we got there three or four in the afternoon.
I think it was set up to start at 3 o'clock.
We were just a little bit late.
We got in there, and during the Q ⁇ A, what amazed me, and you might remember this, during the Q ⁇ A, I started getting political questions from people, and there were a lot of Democrat soldiers in that group.
There were.
There really were.
And they came out and they weren't afraid to ask my opinion on things.
And the thing that, you know, I worried, okay, look at, I'm not over here to discuss politics with them.
This is an appreciation tour.
I mean, I wanted to tell everybody that you're not forgotten.
And just because the media is not doing stories on you doesn't mean that people of the country are forgotten.
And I've forgotten you.
When you get back and you go through the airports, people are going to give you standing ovations when you go off the airplane and walk through the terminal.
The fact that the media is not in Afghanistan, in fact, I said this, the fact they're not there covering what you're doing is a sure sign that what you're doing is a good job because there's nothing going wrong.
There's no reason for the media to be here and cover your actions.
The Q ⁇ A, they wanted to know about Social Security.
They wanted to know about a number of things.
And I had some pretty spirited questions from Democrats, Democrat soldiers in the crowd.
But I never got the impression from any of those Democrat soldiers that they resented being there because they had all volunteered.
I never got the impression from those who were obviously Democrats that they were upset with the policy that sent them there.
Now, you probably know them better than I do, but they had a full opportunity to tell me they were upset with it because they knew I'd be going home and it was a wide open afternoon.
I mean, there was no restrictions on me.
The military let me say what I wanted to say.
There was no restrictions on you guys in the audience.
And I didn't, you know, the reason I bring this up is because Harry Reid yesterday, before he shut down the Senate, said he knows a Democrat soldier.
He says they're not all Republican.
He knows a Democrat soldier.
He knows a Democrat soldier.
And this Democrat soldier doesn't like it, is miserable over there, thinks the military is basically phoning it in.
And I didn't encounter that at all.
Well, you know what?
It's like that woman that called in earlier.
I guarantee you, we knew every single day why we were there.
There was no doubt in anyone's mind why we were there.
And we all felt good about what we were doing.
And yeah, it was dangerous, quite a bit dangerous, you know, a lot of times.
But again, we were doing so much good for the people.
And that was the underlying theme behind every single thing that we did.
We understood the mission.
We knew why we were there.
And we just simply went out and did it.
And we were able to get your website through our satellite onto our computers.
And that was we would just rush for that website every night to get your updates because we didn't have access to any other real news over there.
Yeah, I know.
I saw the television.
You had CNN.
You had CNN delivered.
Some of the places I went had CNN and Fox.
But I'm sure whatever, you're watching the mainstream U.S. media, you're not getting an accurate picture of the American people's opinion of what you're doing.
I'll guarantee you that.
Exactly.
And, you know, I used your website, as a matter of fact, to convert somebody who was very much a liberal Democrat when we came over there.
I converted him to being a conservative Republican and then talked him into going to the college that I went to in Davenport, Iowa here with me.
He was from California, and he's now living here with me.
And he's actually gotten involved in a couple of political campaigns.
So you had a hand in that, too.
Oh, God love you.
You're doing the Lord's work over there.
In addition to saving Afghanistan, you're saving liberal Democrats.
That's right.
Well, good for you.
Well, hey, Jeff, thanks for the call.
I appreciate it.
It's great to hear from you.
It's an honor to talk to you, sir.
Thank you.
I will never forget that week in Afghanistan.
The one place we didn't get to was Bagram Air Force Base, the C-130 that we, in fact, left Kandahar the next day for Bagram Air Force Base, which is not far from where we were based.
But there was a problem with the number four engine, and they had to kill it.
And we spent some time in the air trying to renown.
I'm up in a cockpit because this is all cool to me.
Trying to restart the engine, couldn't had to go back, had to wait for the C-130, which is about six or seven hours.
And by that time, the schedule was blown, and Bagram was the one place that wanted to get to and didn't get to.
So there's a reason to go back.
Quick timeout, we'll be back.
Continuing mere moments on the EIB network.
Well, we all know, ladies and gentlemen, Tom DeLay won his case yesterday and gets a new judge in his Ronnie Earl persecution trial down there in Texas.
Now, the next thing I'm going to do is try to change the venue.
What you may not know is some of the things that Ronnie Earle said in his closing arguments in this trial that were designed to persuade the judge here in leaving the original judge on the case.
Today's Austin American Statesman says Ronnie Earl argued that removing judges under these circumstances could lead to a country split into Shiites, Sunnis, and Kurds.
Reports were that even Democrats in the courtroom were scratching their heads at this one.
This is from the same man who compared the role corporate money plays in campaign finance to terrorism.
That's in this big Bide documentary.
Earl also reportedly attacked Tom DeLay for the intimidation of judges in his closing argument.
That probably means that Earl was alluding to liberal criticism of delay after delay took issue with the manner in which federal judges interpreted the law passed by Congress regarding Terry Shivo.
But nevertheless, this statement had no place in the courtroom, delay intimidating judges.
This reference is a public policy debate.
If he's actually talking about delay trying to intimidate judges with whatever he was saying in the Shaivo case, then he's making it clear Earl is this doofus that he's got delay on trial for politics.
He's charged delay because of political differences.
The guy's an idiot.
If Ronnie Earl keeps talking, his case is going to get thrown out.
And I hope he keeps talking because the more he talks, the more he tells everybody what Democrats are up to these days, politicizing policy differences or criminalizing policy differences.
Here's Bob in Wilmington, Delaware.
Bob, glad you called.
Welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
Wanted to ask you a question.
Yeah.
The question is, I think the Democrats will have a next step.
I'm trying to learn from you in terms of anticipating where the puck's going to be.
In Bolton, they said he was a sleaze, and then they said, well, give us secret documents.
And when the White House wouldn't turn over secret documents, they said that proves he's a sleaze.
I think they're going to do, in this case, Harry Reid's going to ask for secret documents between now and the 14th that he knows the White House can't deliver and say, see, they lied to us about the war.
What do you think?
They may try it.
I don't care.
Let them try it.
Whatever they try is going to bamboozle them.
It's going to backfire on them.
They can try to construct their alternative reality for everybody else to live in, but nobody's going to choose to join them in it, other than their kooks who already have.
It can be documented from here, a month of Sundays, that there was no lying about intelligence by the Bush administration.
There was no manipulation of it because the same intelligence was used in 98 and 99, quoted by Democrats as saying we got to go get Saddam.
He's too dangerous.
It's all pointless.
But since you bring this up, I've referenced this twice on this program.
Let me go ahead and do this.
We're going to post this on the website.
Back in April, actually late March, the Silberman-Robb Commission issued its report, which looked into the questions, specific questions raised about manipulating intelligence, pre-war intelligence, to get us into a war on a false pretense or lies.
We've already had a commission look into this, the Silberman-Robb Commission.
Let me just give you a summary of this from early April.
Yesterday's report to the President by the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the U.S. regarding weapons of mass destruction, also known as the Silberman Report, make it clear that these allegations are false.
Here are some specific findings from the report.
Many observers of the intelligence community have expressed concern that intelligence community judgments concerning Iraq's purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure.
Well, the Commission has found no evidence of politicization of the intelligence community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs.
No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion.
That is from Intelligence Capabilities Commission report pages 187 to 188.
Here's another summary.
We looked very closely at that question, the administration pressuring intelligence analysts.
Every member of the commission was sensitive to the number of questions that have been raised with respect to the what we'll call politicization or however you want to describe it.
And we examined every single instance that had been referred to in print or otherwise to see if there was any occasion where a member of the administration or anybody else had asked an analyst or anybody else associated with the intelligence community to change a position that they were taking or whether they felt there was any undue influence.
And we found absolutely no instance.
Chuck Robb, co-chairman, Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States regarding weapons of mass destruction from a press conference March 31st of this year.
That's what he said.
From page 9, the overview of the report, the intelligence community's Iraq assessments were riddled with errors.
Contrary to what some defenders of the intelligence community have since asserted, these errors were not the result of a few harried months in 2002.
Most of the fundamental errors were made and communicated to policymakers well before the now famous National Intelligence Briefing of October 2002 and were not corrected in the months between the NIE and the start of the war.
They were not isolated or random failings.
Iraq had been an intelligence challenge at the forefront of U.S. attention for over a decade.
It was a known adversary that had already fought one war with the U.S. and seemed increasingly likely to fight another.
But after 10 years of effort, the intelligence community still had no good intelligence on the status of Iraq's weapons programs.
This is from the report, Overview page 9.
No matter where you look in this report, you will find no evidence.
In fact, you will find assertions by Chuck Robb and Lawrence Silverman, the co-chairman of this committee, that there was no manipulation of the intelligence, that nobody lied about it, that nobody asked for any undue influence or brought any undue influence on the analysts to change it.
This accusation was going around about Cheney for the longest time.
That's why they looked into this.
Folks, this is just more evidence on the pile here.
What's happening with the Senate and Dingy Harry shutting it down yesterday is strictly related.
It's unbelievable.
It is literally unbelievable.
They were so intent that this special counsel was going to return an indictment that would lead to the investigation of lies about weapons of mass destruction that they went ahead and created that reality and started living it.
They started planning winning elections on it.
Then no indictment of such comes forth and they are devastated and they can't deal with reality, so they continue living in their false reality.
It all goes back to what I've been saying.
They had control of the government for 40 years.
They lost it.
It's theirs by birthright.
They're entitled to it.
Nobody else is.
When they lost control in 94, haven't been able to get it back.
They don't understand it.
They think the people are stupid, voters are stupid, or else they're being fooled.
They believe in conspiracy theories.
No rational explanation exists for this as far as they're concerned.
I mean, their owning government is something so natural.
It's like we all need to drink water.
Liberals run government.
We all need water.
And when there's no water, when there's no government, there has to be a conspiracy.
Has to be some series of conspiracies to explain this.
Can't be their fault.
Can't be they've lost touch.
If the truth be known, they even resent having to be elected.
They arranged elections for so many years that they were mere formalities.
But now they lose them, and so something's wrong, but not with them.
The elections being stolen, voting machines malfunction, tampered with, votes not counted, whatever.
But no matter where you look, this case they're trying to make will not stand up no matter what.
There is nothing, absolutely nothing to what they claim.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the excellence in podcasting network.
Someday, you never know.
Great to have you back, 800-282-2882.
You want more evidence of a liberal and media crackup?
In an editorial arguing for diversity on the U.S. Supreme Court after the nomination of Sam Alito, the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel suggested that Justice Clarence Thomas does not count as a black.
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel newspaper.
This is not a weekend penny saver.
This is the newspaper in Milwaukee.
The Daily Newspaper's editorial board, lamenting the choice of a man to replace Sandra Dale Connor, opined in losing a woman, the court with Alito would feature seven white men, one white woman, and a black man who deserves an asterisk.
because he arguably does not represent the views of mainstream black America.
The papers said that the Alito nomination is troubling because it's liable to divide America and it lessens the extent to which the court mirrors the nation's rich diversity.
Let me tell you something.
I know that the people at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel listen to this program.
There are several reporters there that have written about this program.
And I'm going to tell you, you people are doing one of the greatest services that we could hope to have done.
You are cracking up right along with the rest of the left.
You will go out and you'll write stories about Bill Clinton as the first black president and you will think that you are being brilliant and you will think that you're being clever.
You take an African American, Clarence Thomas, and you say he's not black.
He doesn't qualify because he doesn't represent the views of the blacks in this country.
How would you know in Milwaukee?
How would you know what the vast majority, you are making assumptions here, but beyond that, where did you people go to school?
Who taught you that the Supreme Court is supposed to represent the diversity of the population?
Who taught you that that's the purpose of the Supreme Court?
Do you actually believe that only blacks, the correct ones, can represent other blacks?
Only women can represent women.
Only Catholics can represent Catholic.
Well, screw the Catholics.
We ought to get rid of all of them and the Christians, too.
Do you really believe this?
This is what passes, my friends, for enlightened journalism and important community participation from the editorial board of the Milwaukee Urinal Sentinel for, I mean, 10 years ago, this would have enraged me.
I would have been pounding the despair.
This just makes me smile.
They are all losing it.
They are telling us who they really are.
This is so wonderful.
For the longest time, they've been able to mask themselves as the smartest people in the room, the elites, above everyone else, smarter than everyone else.
Moderates, we're not ideologues.
We see the truth through all the fog.
Now we find out you're just a bunch of common, ordinary, everyday, run-amok liberals.
You're just a bunch of huge, uninformed, ill-educated, bigoted leftists is what you are.
You are intolerant.
You are mean-spirited.
You are extremist, and you are out of the mainstream.
All of the things that you think everybody else in the country is but you.
And yet you are coming to define it.
Sticking with this topic, so to speak, Washington Post today has a column by the brilliant, erudite, and one of a kind, David Ignatius.
The headline of his column is, Meet the New Elite.
Maybe we hear this.
With the nomination of Princeton and Yale law grad Sam Alito to the Supreme Court, I'm beginning to sense a theme in the Bush administration's rocky second term.
We are witnessing the rise of the Republican A students.
The preppy frat boy is gradually assembling a government of GOP meritocrats.
Meritocrats, for those of you in Riolinda.
The preppy frat boy, George W. Bush.
So we're going to go back to the original way he was characterized, too, huh?
He's just a partying frat boy, not a serious bone in his body.
And now all of a sudden, he's surrounding himself with the Republican A students.
So what are we now complaining about how smart the nominees are?
Alito is a pedigreed member of America's new aristocracy of brains, as you could hope to find.
After Princeton and Yale, he punched all the right tickets.
Circuit court clerk, assistant U.S. attorney, assistant to the solicitor general, office of the legal counsel of the Justice Department, U.S. Attorney, and then a spot as an appellate judge.
What, Mr. Ignatius, you have an inferiority complex here?
What?
What's wrong with any of this?
Would this even be written about a Bill Clinton nominee who went to Yale, who went to Princeton?
I mean, the president's new court nominee follows his supremely credentialed choice for Chief Justice John G. Roberts, a graduate of Harvard and Harvard law, then made the grand tour of elite law jobs as a Supreme Court clerk, associate White House counsel, and deputy solicitor general.
What was striking during Roberts' confirmation process was that all of Washington's other A students, Republican and Democratic, seemed to know and like him.
I don't know what you mean by other A students.
There weren't any Democrat A students on the Judiciary Committee.
This guy was running intellectual rings around them, and so will Alito.
You can argue that this is excellence by default and that the president's first instincts were shown in the nomination of Harriet Myers.
But Myers himself was no slouch in the RSUM department with a trailblazing role as the first female.
It goes on and on and on.
Once upon a time, conservatives instinctively mistrusted the A students who had won all the merit badges.
That sort of government by RSUM was a phenomenon of the old patrician Democratic elite.
They sailed out of Harvard and Yale and into government with the self-confidence born of good grades and a network of mentors.
He fails this.
It's classic.
He does not understand conservatives.
No liberal will ever understand conservatives.
He thinks there's no difference between a conservative A student and a liberal A student.
The difference between a conservative A student and a liberal A student is the difference between a conservative and a liberal.
And the grade doesn't matter.
So, remember, what were some of the outrageous Roberts, oh, he didn't grow up in a neighborhood with blacks and Jews.
Jews.
And he had never known hardship in his life.
He couldn't relate to the poor.
The poor.
And now Alito's so smart, he can't relate to anybody.
He's just the smartest guy in the room.
Too smart.
We should be suspicious of this.
President Bush, despite his own Andover and Yale pedigree, still does a surprisingly good job of sounding like an outsider.
Am I crazy or does he speak with more of a Texas accent today than when he took office?
But when you look at the people he's nominated for key posts, it's the GOP nomenklatura.
This particular group is lopsidedly white and male, and like most collections of meritocrats, too little shaped by the hard scrabble America that politicians like to celebrate.
But they will give Bush some bottom and balance in his second term.
So I guess he's not really worried because Bush is still a dunce.
Bush is still an idiot.
Bush can still sound like one at any rate.
But we never hear about all of Clinton's white, lilywhite nominees far more in the Clinton administration than in the Bush administration.
This is just more evidence of a huge disconnect and a group of people, the left, totally off balance.
Just a week ago, they thought they owned it.
A week ago, they thought they were going to get it all back.
A week ago, they were settling in on plans to impeach Bush.
Now, after one week, an end run that they cannot explain and could not see has rendered them once again in the throes of depression.
I must take a brief break here, my friends, and be back and continue in mere moments.
Stay with us.
Well, isn't this just fun?
Apparently, now, the day two of the assault on Bush and needing to be impeached and lying about weapons of mass destruction, Dingy Harry and Nancy Pelosi have sent a letter to George W. Bush demanding answers of the independent counsel investigation and suggesting that Karl Rove needs to be fired or dismissed.
The Democrats are now conducting a press conference to speak about Iraq.
There's Senator Christopher Dodd.
I saw Barbara Boxer walk in with him.
And they once again start this press conference with but mere moments remaining in this program.
Here's Matt and Clayton, Ohio.
Welcome, sir.
Nice to have you on the program.
Hi, Rush.
Mega Buckeye Dittos.
Thank you, sir.
I would assert that the Democrats and the left is missing the point that the one who lied was Saddam Hussein.
I believe that the UN's resolution said that Saddam had to prove that he had disarmed.
And to my understanding, he never proved that he disarmed.
The one who lied was Saddam, not Bush.
Yep.
I know, I know.
We have to rehash this.
We can do it all day long.
After 9-11, preemptive strikes against potential enemies authorized by members of Congress and the Senate, these people that signed the resolution.
Saddam was not forthcoming.
He wanted the Arab world to think that he was the big guy to take down the United States and take them on.
And he thought that this bluff would turn us away because it had in the past.
He had been able to bluff Bill Clinton.
Al-Qaeda had been able to bluff Clinton out of Somalia.
And he found he was dealing with a different character in George W. Bush.
That's an interesting way to put it.
If anybody lied about weapons of mass destruction, it was Saddam.
But I somebody, there was a back of my mind all day.
There was a BBC story sometime last year in 2004.
It featured Spencer Abraham.
And Spencer Abraham, energy secretary or something at the time, was admitting that 1.77 million something or other of radioactive material had been found in Iraq.
And it was good that we had captured this stuff because had it found its way in the hands of terrorists, it would be problematic, obviously.
We found some radioactive material in Iraq, quite a sizable amount of it.
This is yeah.
Okay, yeah, I have a vague memory of it, but we'll, yeah, yeah, there's something, yeah, there was a bunch of stuff found that there was stuff found in Rotterdam shipped from Iraq.
I mean, this is this is, it's like the Twilight Zone here, folks.
I'm sorry to have to keep stuttering and stammering around all this, but this is, it's like dealing with kids, and I've never dealt with kids, thankfully.
When they lie to you, and you know they're lying, I mean, it just, it just, what do you say?
It's just, it's, Huh, it's just impossible to comprehend this.
Well, it's not impossible to comprehend it.
It is just stunning to me to see all of this actually be attempted.
When you're looking at people that are deranged, when you're looking at people that are truly pathological, when you're looking at an emotional psychological meltdown, and it's happening right in front of you, right before your very eyes, it's hard to describe.
I don't feel sorry for them.
No, no, no, it's not that.
It's almost like I don't believe it.
That's what makes it the twilight zone.
It's almost like I'm dreaming.
These people cannot be this stupid.
They just, and they're not, I think this is hubris and arrogance and believing they still set the agenda and can control whatever the American people read, see, and hear.
It's like so much of reality has just passed them by and escapes them.
And you wonder how that's possible.
As one who's immersed totally in reality, folks, I never fantasize.
I never play the what-if game.
I never tell myself things are other than what they are.
And I guess that's one of the problems I'm having here.
It is truly mentally unhealthy.
It's just kids do this.
You pretend.
You run around when you're five years old in the backyard thinking that you're little Joe on Bonanza.
You know, after a couple of months of it, they send you off to a person that wears a little white coat to help you deal with it.
You really think you're little Joe?
Yeah, I watch the show every night.
I'm Little Joe on Bonanza.
I want to be called Little Joe.
There was a kid in school thought he was little Joe of Bonanza.
Everybody was worried about it.
That's what I'm looking at here.
Greg in Boston.
Hello, sir, and welcome to the EIB Network.
Great to have you with us.
Rush, it's my distinct pleasure to be on the air with you.
I've waited 10 years for this moment.
Thank you, Chad.
You're an inspiration.
You know what's laughable is that Clarence Thomas is being called not mainstream.
I find that absolutely laughable considering the fact you had a very, very eloquent gentleman, black gentleman from North Carolina on your show about a month ago that hit the nail on the head.
And this is what scares the left the most, that blacks are leaving the Democrat plantation.
Case in point, mainstream blacks, Rush, are overwhelmingly pro-life.
They're anti-homosexual marriage.
They're pro-death penalty.
They're pro-Christian conservative family values.
They're pro-social security reform because, as you know, the people who get screwed the most with the current system are black males with the shortest life expectancy.
They are extremely pro-school vouchers, unlike the Democrat constituencies and primary constituency, the NEA, who don't know.
Wait, wait.
Hold it here.
I'd love to believe you on this, but the election returns just don't show it.
Well, the election returns.
But Rush, he got more.
Blacks voted more for Bush in 2004 than they did in 2000.
It's trending positively, is it not?
Yeah, but it's still 90% that vote for Democrats.
Look, I understand exactly what you're saying, and I know that the element of the black population that believes, as you described, is there, and I know it's sizable, but they're still outnumbered.
That's not the point.
The point is, here you have the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel engaging in blatant bigotry, blatant racism.
Clarence Thomas isn't black enough.
He doesn't think like a black person.
So you have a bunch of white liberals in a newsroom, in an editorial board, typical people that run the white plantation telling blacks how they have to think, telling blacks how they have to act.
If they want to be supported by upper-level whites, you've got to think X. You got to agree with us.
You basically got to be a liberal socialist.
And if you're off the plantation, man, you may as well not even be black as far as we're concerned.
You're an enemy.
Now, that's the thing that you've got these upper elitist snobs who are trying to tell everybody else who the racist extremists are, who themselves are the most condescending, insulting, arrogant bunch of people you could ever run into in the political spectrum, demanding that blacks think a certain way.
This is Stalinist, folks.
Demanding that people act and think a certain way or you're going to get punished.
That is Stalinist.
You are an enemy of the state.
Clarence Thomas is an enemy of the liberal state because his mind is not right.
His mind is under control.
And so he's not really black.
Well, I can't say what I want to say to these people in Milwaukee, but if I ever see them personally, I'll be sure and pass it on the way I want to.
Back after this.
Yeah, here it is.
We'll put this on the website.
We'll link to it.
It's July 2004.
U.S. has revealed that it removed more than 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material from Iraq in a secret operation last month.
That would be June of 2004.
It's the BBC UK edition on their website.
Spencer Abraham called the operation a major achievement.
Out of time.
Lots to do.
See you tomorrow.
Cheerio.
▲
Export Selection