All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 14, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:30
November 14, 2005, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Now here's an interesting story for you.
Today's Wall Street Journal reports that writers in Hollywood, TV writers, screenwriters, are objecting to all of the product placement that's going on in TV shows or in movies.
This product placement is.
It's like hidden advertising.
You see an automobile, you see a certain model of Mercedes, for example, or if you see somebody shaving with a certain kind of shaving gel, say Edge, or if you see someone reading a certain book, say a Stephen King novel, there's a good chance that the company that makes that product paid the TV show or paid the producers of the movie to put it in there.
And there's a backlash against this from the screenwriters who, as you might guess, can't stand the fact that they're being told, you've got to write a segment here that somehow makes reference to Big Penns.
The Wall Street Journal reporting, fed up with being called upon to promote products in movies and television shows.
Hollywood's writers and actors unions are pushing studios to agree to new rules covering product placements.
The Writers Guild and the Screen Actors Guild complain placement practices hurt their artistic integrity.
And they aren't paid to help sell the products placed in movies and TV shows.
This inclusive process is getting more and more out of hand, says Patrick Varone, president of the Writers Guild of America West.
Well, first of all, they don't have any artistic integrity.
The moment that they chose to go to work for someone else and write a script on somebody else's movie or in someone else's television show, they gave up their artistic integrity.
They're simply employees.
And if they don't like being told that for this episode of this television show, you've got to write a segment that draws attention to this product, they don't have to take that job.
So there is no artistic integrity once you choose to work for someone else.
That being said, it is kind of obnoxious.
You know, they see people gratuitously throwing all these things around.
I sit here looking at my Dell computer that nicely has been put up for me by the Rush Limbaugh people, uh, Rush Limbaugh.com, of course, is the website where you can keep up to date on Rush, even when he's not here doing the program.
And the Wall Street Journal was the source of the item that I mentioned.
You know, can we now retroactively send out a bill for all those product placements that I just did?
I don't know that I actually mind it much.
Everybody nitpicks on that kind of thing.
The thing that I object to is when you watch a sporting event, when they put up these fake signs, like when Fox does a baseball game, they'll show you that backdrop behind home plate where there's a billboard and it looks like it's one of those billboards that in fact are at the baseball stadiums.
It's not.
It's their own fake billboard, which is why they often promote a show that's on Fox or something else.
The worst case is in automobile racing.
A couple of years ago when ABC was showing the Indy 500, coming out of the fourth turn and coming home, they had this sign there for Oldsmobile, which doesn't even exist anymore, so I guess the product placement didn't work very well.
And you saw this Oldsmobile sign every time the cars have come out of the it wasn't there.
It was graphically created.
It was electronically generated.
It was not there.
Now on my own local radio program in Milwaukee, I brought this up, and I ranted and rape for thirty.
Nobody cared.
Nobody cares about that.
They don't object to it at all.
Do you guys care about this?
No, no one cares.
Since no one cares, I won't talk about it anymore, and I've got bad news for the uh writers and the actors in Hollywood.
No one's going to care about it either.
I'm your only supporter.
All right, let's get up to date on the situation in Jordan.
I mentioned at the beginning of the program that today's show was kind of a bad news, good news kind of program.
The bad news is obvious.
Al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists are now looking at other places for their terror, such as the attacks last week in Jordan, now attacking in other Middle Eastern nations.
That's obviously bad, and there is a terrible human cost associated with it.
It's also frightening that you see terror literally going global, and now even in nations in the Middle East, in which the population may be not only is majority Muslim, but maybe somewhat supportive of the terrorist movement.
The good news is that I don't think it's gonna work.
I don't think it's going to achieve the goals of Al-Qaeda.
Look at the reaction in Jordan.
They're furious.
Zarkawi, who is the leader of the Iraqi branch of Al Qaeda and is essentially claiming responsibility for this, they're condemning him.
Everybody's condemning him.
The Jordanian population had a fair amount of support for the terrorism that was going on in Iraq.
They don't have that anymore.
The other thing that I think this will do is it's going to prove what this terrorism is all about and prove what Islamist, not Islamic, but Islamist extremism is all about.
They demand purity.
They demand purity.
Why would they hit Jordan, for example?
I guess the Jordanian government is not sufficiently supportive of this notion of a jihad having the great holy war and kill everyone who isn't a Muslim.
When they establish that, they demand this purity.
They're going to alienate many of the people in the Arab world who might otherwise have supported them.
And for all the criticism that President Bush has received about why we went to war with Iraq, I think the fact, and it is a fact, is that Al Qaeda and the other terror groups have had to change their strategies now because the democracy in Iraq is establishing itself.
They're very frustrated.
They see Iraq's government getting a little bit stronger every day.
They see other Middle Eastern nations recognizing and accepting that government, nations like Jordan.
So now they run off to Jordan and they sent in a few suicide bombers and they have an attack there, trying to punish the Jordanian government, punish the Jordanian people for not being sufficiently sufficiently supportive of their extremist movement in an attempt to throw off the Iraqi government, and it isn't working.
Now you compare and contrast the reaction in Jordan with the reaction in France.
It's terrorism of a different sort, but it's still terrorism.
And there is an Islamist link to it.
The French are tripping all over themselves.
Well, we need to be more sensitive to the needs of our immigrant population.
We need to understand that we are becoming a multicultural society.
We need to understand this, we need to understand that you're not getting any of this understanding stuff in Jordan.
They want to kill the terrorists.
They want to kill the terrorists.
Which is why I suspect Al Qaeda is going to be less likely to strike again in Jordan than they will in France.
French government, by the way, is celebrating, they believe that the rioting is starting to end.
There were only 300, there were 274 car bombings yesterday, down from 384 the day before the uh French are citing that somehow as uh as progress.
In the meantime, a major coup by the Jordanian government, they have in custody, this woman who in fact is a relative of a Zarkawe ally, whose suicide bomb did not go off.
And she confessed, and they're showing the confession on live television.
Uh, by the way, memo to Senator McCain, I hope they didn't engage in any torture to get that confession.
That would be terrible if anything like that occurred.
She appeared to willingly confess, so I guess Senator McCain would be okay with that.
She uh described what the plan was.
Her husband was the guy who went into the Radisson Hotel and blew himself up, killing a number of people.
She uh stated in her confession, my husband and I went into the hotel, he took a corner, I took another.
There was a wedding with children, women and men inside.
He executed the attack.
I tried to detonate, and it failed.
People started running.
I ran with them.
At one point during the interview, the woman stood, unbuttoned her coat, and modeled the bomb belt that had been strapped to her body, twirling in a slow circle for the camera, that description in today's New York Post.
So here you have this woman loaded up with bombs, confessing on television, yes, my husband did it, and I was going to do it.
Coldly, calculatingly, without any real emotion, describing how she intended to kill herself and a lot of other people.
She is the sister of Zukawi's uh right hand man, Mubarak Atrus al-Rishwahi, He was killed earlier this year by United States forces.
Now, as she gives this confession, and she speaks, and this wasn't seen just in Jordan, this was seen all over the world.
You're now able to put a face on these suicide terrorists.
We have been wondering ever since 9-11 who could do this, who could get on a plane, kill all of these people, and die themselves.
Now you see, it's this blank staring woman that appears to have no emotional response at all.
Her husband's dead.
She's staring straight ahead at the camera.
She was supposed to be dead.
She's not.
So now why do you figure she couldn't get her bomb to go off?
She said she pulled on the thing and it didn't go off the way.
This is the biggest wardrobe malfunction since Janet Jackson.
You know what I think it really gets down to, though?
They're running out of good suicide bombers.
All the good ones are dead.
Can I sell that line to Leno, do you think or not?
I don't know.
There is a serious point to be associated with it, though.
I don't know how long the Zarkawis and the other terrorist leaders of the world are going to be able to look upon this just seemingly endless supply of people who are willing to die for the cause.
The first string is all gone.
They sent them over on 9-11.
They've been killing themselves in Israel for years.
When you take a look at who this woman is and who her husband is, they are relatives of a very high-ranking member of Al Qaeda.
This wasn't some grunt.
This wasn't some impressionable young man whose family came out of abject poverty and was able to be duped into killing himself.
You're talking fairly high-ranking people here.
It is conceivable that this suicide bomber movement is starting to peter out.
When they have to start going to people like this woman who couldn't even get her bomb to detonate, and whose brother was a top person in Al Qaeda, it does raise the possibility that they are running out of people who are willing to engage in this kind of thing.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
I talked about this bad news, good news theme that I have today.
Well, here's some bad news.
For the first time, I'm open to the possibility that Hillary Clinton can be elected president.
This decision to go to Jordan and look at the bombing site was brilliant.
She even dragged Bill along.
They're doing the hand holding thing and the photo op.
And then she gets out and she talks real tough.
Quote, at the moments when all people should be respectful, these people have no respect for anyone or anything.
They believe in death and nihilism.
And I just hope that all people, humanity, will work to destroy this network of terrorism.
I mean, that's strong stuff.
That's strong stuff.
She said exactly the right thing.
And she was there at exactly the right time.
Maybe Bush should have been there.
Instead of running off to Asia or wherever wherever he's going, she went there and she became the face of the American government, showing how angry it is at this type of terrorism.
It was a very, very smart thing for her to do.
And then she ups the ante.
She talks even tougher.
She defends the Israeli-Palestinian fence.
You know that border?
She doesn't exactly say where the fence should be, and she isn't clear as to whether or not it's going to be in the new parts of the West Bank where the Israelis have vacated.
But she now comes out in favor of the fence.
She's talking as right wing as Rush is, for heaven's sake.
And I think people might start to buy it.
I'm not quite at the level of buying it yet, but I gotta tell you, I approve of what she did.
And it's pretty strong condemnation for an American United States senator to go there in the middle of this wreckage and condemn it.
And I know why she did it.
She learned this game from her husband.
It was probably Bill's idea.
Make yourself appear to be conservative when you're running for something.
But the message that she sends is a strong one.
And it draws direct attention to what the terrorists are doing.
It is the ultimate act of selfishness.
And she goes and says it in the Middle East, where I think criticism of terrorism is right now a notion that's going to be accepted by a lot of people.
Some of these Middle Eastern countries, do they really want Al Qaeda to start coming in and bombing their own nations?
It's one thing where the great Satan of the United States is sitting in there in Iraq.
It's another thing to blow up Israel.
When you start hitting Jordan, that's got to make a lot of Arab Muslims very, very concerned about the direction of where world terrorism is leading.
To Salt Lake City and Mitch.
Mitch, you're on EIB with Mark Belling.
Hi, Mark.
Thanks for taking my call.
Say uh I I just don't believe that Hillary Clinton in any way, shape, or form is going to be elected president.
Well, I never have, and I still don't.
But you got to admit this was a master stroke.
Now, I don't think it's sincere because I don't think the Clintons have a sincere bone in their body, but it was a master stroke.
And she said all the right things.
Is it was it a master stroke that she appeared at the uh the fireman's fundraiser after 9-11?
Was that a master stroke?
No, that wasn't.
I agree.
I I think that her showing up at any time after a disaster just shows her true colors.
And yeah, I I mean uh the thing that I I like about it is that I think that this attack by Al Qaeda in Jordan is an indication of a change in direction by the terrorist movement.
They have in the past generally only hit easily defined enemies of their goofy jihad that they're looking for.
By going to Jordan here, a country which, by the way, isn't rich, they don't have any oil in Jordan or not much oil, they're not a rich nation.
By going after Jordan, I think they're sending a really, really strong message that they're changing their tactics and they're not willing to kill anybody that disagrees with them, not just Christians, not just Jews, not just Americans.
We'll kill fellow Muslims, we'll kill fellow Arabs, we're gonna go and kill anywhere where we don't get purity.
The comment that I make about Hillary is that I think that what she said was exactly the right thing to say and does express a unity between the United States and now Jordan, which is just the latest victim of Al Qaeda's terror, to Fort Wayne, Indiana, Fred.
Fred, you're on EIB with Mark.
I'd like to see a little more consistency on Ms. Clinton's part.
You know, you can just play the polls and the focus groups uh I'm not suggesting she's doing anything for the right reason here.
I'm just saying that I think that she did do something politically shrewd.
The other point I wanted to make, I mean, they may be temporarily low on adept bomb makers right now, but I think they could still find plenty of uh people that could brainwash or just you know, train to uh push a button.
I mean, you could train an ape to do that, and they're already using dogs in some cases, but uh, you know, it takes a little smarts to get away.
Yeah, you're referring to my comment about why this woman became a suicide bomber given that she is fairly well connected in the Al-Qaeda movement.
I I'm I'm not gonna tell you that I'm naive enough to think that they aren't growing terrorists on trees.
The message of hate and killing yourself and seeing Allah the next movement has really taken hold with a lot of young Middle Eastern males.
They've really bought into it, which is why there's been this seemingly endless supply in Israel.
I am struck, though, that they went to a woman who has pretty strong connections in Al Qaeda, was a relative of a former Al Qaeda operative, now dead, and she was someone who took upon this task.
Also, if they're going to start using leaders, who's going to be left?
I mean, I think it's possi I think it's possible that they right now, on the suicide bomber employment rules, they might be having a they might be having some shortages.
I think that that's possible.
I also think that while these attacks in Jordan were terrible, and the loss of life is awful, and there are probably going to be more.
I do think it may represent a turn in Arab public opinion against terror.
It's very, very easy for a Muslim Arab to support terrorism against Israel, especially if you bought into this notion that the Zionist world is evil.
And it's Rather easy to support terrorism in Iraq if you can buy into the notion that somehow the United States is forcing its will upon the Iraqi people.
There's going to be a lot more resistance.
If they start hitting routinely in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, or any of the other Gulf states.
If they start doing that, I do think there is going to be a lot of questions raised in the Arab world about whether or not Al Qaeda is this noble group that we should support, or whether they aren't, exactly what the United States has said all along they are, which is a bunch of terrorists.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
Rush needs to be here today because I know I'm going to screw this up.
This is a big thing.
Russia's adopt a soldier program is beginning today.
Now, if I misstate anything, you're going to correct me.
This is Russia's deal.
If I mess it up, I'm going to hear about it and I won't ever be back.
I don't want to screw this up.
The way the Adopt a Soldier program works is with a discount attached, you can subscribe to Rush 247, Limbaugh Letter, combination subscription, and this will be sent to an American soldier.
It's called the Adopt a Soldier Program.
The way it works is if you are an active duty member of the United States military anywhere in the world, we want you to come to Rush Limbaugh.com and sign up for a subscription donated by our listeners.
If you're the family member of an active duty military member, you can come to this form and sign up your soldier on their behalf.
For example, if you've got a son or a brother that is serving anywhere, you can go to the site and set that individual up with a subscription to Rush 247 Limbaugh Letter also.
If you're a soldier on active duty anywhere in the world, you can sign up and your name will then be applied and you'll be matched with somebody who takes part in the Adopt a Soldier program.
I've got it right so far.
I haven't misstated anyhow.
So far I've got it.
The email on the program, I've been told by the staff, has been overwhelming.
There are a lot of people who want to do this.
We're coming into the Christmas season.
It's a great time to do it.
They want to give the gift of Rush to a person who's protecting our freedom in the military.
So thanks to each of our gift givers who have already adopted a soldier, the best thing to do is for all those who know and can reach out to those in active duty all over the world, let them know there are many of us who want to support them, and we encourage these great men and women to make themselves known to us and sign up for adoption.
Now, unfortunately, we can't send these to people who aren't asking for them, right?
Are there any liberal members of the military left anymore?
There probably aren't any who really need Rush 24-7, but there's about five of them, so we can't target them.
But if you're in the military, active duty anywhere, all you have to do is sign up.
And as the adopter soldier, members come in and the donations come in, you'll be set up with a subscription to uh Rush 24-7, which does include the Limbaugh letter, correct?
All begins today.
Just go to Rush Limbaugh.com and it'll be explained even more clearly than I managed to do here.
I don't want to be misinterpreted about my comments about Hillary, and I certainly do not want to sound like I'm shilling for her candidacy for the presidency.
I just think it was a smart thing that she did when she went over to Jordan and with Bill in tow, and he wasn't tow.
You see they have hand holding, I mean holy, she's dragging them along.
We have to do this.
So it's a smart thing that she's doing.
And it is also nice that the Clintons, all these many years later suddenly do understand that Al Qaeda is a problem.
You know, when he was in the White House, he did have the ability to start doing something about it.
All he did was lob a couple of bombs here and there, talk tough, and go away, leaving Al Qaeda far stronger than when he came into the White House, but he's showing interest now, five years after he could have done anything about it.
Back to the telephones.
Twinsburg, Ohio.
Amy, Amy, you're on Russia's program with Mark Belling.
Hi, thank you for taking my call.
I I think it could be important to understand, but I have to confess I really don't understand the situation about this woman who apparently tried but failed to blow herself up, although her husband succeeded and then proceeded to confess on national television.
Um it makes me wonder if she went unwillingly.
You know, why didn't on the one hand, why wouldn't she just try again?
Right.
Uh on the other hand, you know, would her life have been in danger for failing, you know, from her own people, or uh you know, why why would she sort of submit to to be a very good idea?
Yeah, I think those are all good questions.
I mean, she was stra if you look at the the uh the confession she gave.
She was strapped up, it looked like she could have blown the whole country off the map for heaven's sakes.
Yet it didn't work, it didn't go off.
She may have outsmarted her husband.
Yeah.
Okay, honey.
See see you in heaven, and then he does his thing and then her oops, it didn't work.
That may be the case, which would again point to my argument that maybe all the good suicide bombers are gone and they're now using the unwilling or those who are coerced.
On the other hand, it was her brother who was a top aide to El Zarkawe, but we do know that women don't exactly have a lot of rights in the jihadist world, so she may have been forced to go out and do this.
As it is, I do think that she is tremendous propaganda for the anti-terror movement because you're putting a face on a a face on someone here, and you're seeing her just coldly describe this.
It's not a pretty picture.
Right.
In more ways than one, if you got to look at her.
Thank you for the call, Amy, to uh Brooklyn and Anne.
And you're on EIB with Mark Belling.
Oh, it's tremendous exciting and great honor to speak with you, Mark.
Thank you.
There's a theory that's pretty current among people who study the Middle East, and that is that the recruitment of women as suicide bombers is culturally quite different from what motivates men.
Women can be vulnerable to being recruited if they've been convicted of an adulterous relationship which brings disgrace on their family name.
Now, honor is everything in the extremist a la Islamic world, and the only way a disgraced woman can regain honor for her family is to volunteer as a suicide bomber and die as a heroic martyr.
It would suggest, though, that I mean, I wouldn't think the best person for a job like this would be somebody who may not be willingly doing it.
Wouldn't you agree?
I think you're absolutely right, but I think that the desire to regain honor and to die as a martyr to save her family from disgrace, uh, this can be a very strong motive.
Now it is clear that this was a major initiative for Al Qaeda, just as the attacks on nine eleven was a new step in their taking the terror war to America.
You know, there were some fairly high ranking al Qaeda members who were suicide bombers on the flights of nine eleven.
I imagine that with the situation in Jordan, they didn't want to screw this up and they wanted to inflict maximum damage, so that might be one of the reasons why rather high-ranking and well connected people were involved, because normally the uh jihadists are cowards.
They talk a good game and then they recruit the very easily influenced, generally young males who have not, you know, gotten to a high level within the organization, and they use them as cannon fodder.
In this instance, you're talking about somebody who seemed to be rather well connected.
She certainly was armed for battle.
I just think it's weird that her bomb didn't go off.
How does that happen?
It's is as much ammunition as she had if she would have struck stood in front of a car, she probably would have blown herself up and done all of this damage.
Yeah, you're right.
But um I've been in Israel a couple of times, and there had been some really major Islamic failures in Israel, uh, where bombs didn't go off, where things malfunctioned.
Uh I think they have a lot of technology.
I think like anybody else, they only have to be right once.
They can be wrong ninety-eight percent of the time.
Right.
That's the scary thing about terrorism.
It is very hard anywhere in the world to stop because it's so easy to do.
And the thing that has been frightening about the jihadist movement is there has seemed to be this endless supply of individuals willing to do it.
In the end, though, they do need money and they do need political support.
And I do think that this is a sign of desperation that they felt a need to go to Jordan and strike there.
Why Jordan?
I thought they were trying to stop the new Iraqi government from taking hold.
They haven't been successful at that.
So they're not trying to fomat a opposition elsewhere in the Arab world with Arab nations that are supportive of the new Iraqi government, and I don't think it's going to work.
I mean, it's almost been unanimous from Jordan.
The condemnation and the criticism of Al Qaeda and Zakha Zakawi himself for his involvement in this.
So I don't think it's working.
And I think that if anything, the terror movement in the Middle East is losing popularity rather than gaining it.
I appreciate the call in, thank you.
My name is Mark Belling, and I'm sitting in for Rush.
I'm Mark Belling sitting in for Rush on EIB.
Howard Dean was on Meet the Press yesterday with Tim Russert.
And he was asked about the attacks that are being waged against a Republican candidate for the United States Senate in Maryland, Michael Steele.
Michael Steele is the lieutenant governor of Maryland, black Republican, and he has been the subject of remarkably frank and hateful attacks based on his race.
And they are coming not from the Klan.
They're not coming from David Duke.
They're coming from the left.
Howard Dean was asked by Tim Russert to condemn these attacks and to apologize to Michael Steele, and he would not do it.
I mean, Russert dropped this in his lap.
It would have been very easy for Dean to mutter out something or another, well, obviously I deplore any racial reference to Mr. Steele, we don't agree with his politics, and he certainly would be a terrible United States Senator, but these things he could have he could have done that.
He chose not to.
He chose not to.
I don't think this is coincidental.
These attacks now against Steele are relatively unabashed.
They seem to be coming without any embarrassment.
They're not slips of the tongue.
They're fairly direct, and I think it is part of a pattern now.
Black conservatives, black Republicans, and for that matter, any minority group member who dares not to be liberal is being subjected to attacks that are extremely harsh and are focused on race.
I mean, this is coming as 90% of American blacks voted in the last election for Kerry, according to all of the polls.
Yet there's this fear bordering on paranoia of blacks who try to work within a different power structure.
They're either conservative or they're in the Republican Party.
They've made their choice to go that direction.
The attacks are really hateful.
Now, why wouldn't Dean condemn them?
Why wouldn't Dean step out front on this?
I believe they're going to continue.
I think that there is a fear on the part of a lot of liberals that this notion of prominent American blacks, openly conservative, openly Republican, is going to take hold.
Take a look at the prominent American black leaders right now.
They're almost all Republican.
Condoleza Rice is the Secretary of State of the United States.
She succeeded Colin Powell in that position.
Ask most Americans to name a black member of Congress.
They might come up with Charlie Wrangle, but for a lot of them, they're going to go back to J.C. Watts, and he hasn't even been there for several years.
The only black on the Supreme Court of the United States is Clarence Thomas.
I think that there is a fear from the left about this and this notion of bringing their race into play and suggesting that they are disloyal to their own race is becoming an accepted tactic.
They probably have a fear that if Michael Steele does become the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Maryland, that he will draw votes from blacks who might otherwise be expected to support the Democratic nominee because after all, white liberals just presume that all blacks are going to be with them in the election.
That's the way they like it and they don't want it to change.
So you've got to discredit Steele and suggest that he isn't really black or that he is a sellout.
The terminology is Harry Belafani last year with the comment about Holand Colin Powell.
The use of a deplorable slur.
Didn't apologize for it.
Now in my own community of Milwaukee.
A couple of weeks ago there was an editorial in the local newspaper on the nomination of Sam Alito to the Supreme Court.
In that editorial, they talked about how this was a blow to diversity because Alito is another white male.
Lord knows we can't have more white males.
So then they ran the rundown of the court.
And they said that they're all of these white males.
Then we've got Ruth Baderginsburg.
And then we have Clarence Thomas, who, quote, deserves an asterisk.
That's what they put in their editorial.
That Thomas deserves an asterisk.
Because his views lie outside the African American mainstream.
Since that time, thanks in part to me, and to the fact that we now have a world in which things move very quickly.
Rush talked about it in his program.
The bloggers picked up on it, it was on the internet.
There's been harsh criticism of that newspaper from all over the country for daring to suggest that Thomas literally doesn't deserve his own race.
They used the word deserve, and they said that his race should be marked with an asterisk in describing the diversity of the Supreme Court.
They've been under harsh attack for doing this.
They've been properly labeled as bigoted, but they will not back down.
In fact, the editorial writer who wrote the editorial in yesterday's paper defended what he wrote.
Gregory Stanford, who is himself black and a liberal, he writes, to my dismay, what I believe to be a mere statement of fact.
Through charges of racism, conservative talk radio and the right wing blogosphere fanned the flames.
The aside merely stated a fact we best recognize.
The views of Clarence Thomas lie outside the mainstream black thought.
Well, even if you're to accept the notion that there is something that can be described as black thought, whatever that is, they used the term asterisk.
Suggesting now that when we're evaluating Americans on the basis of diversity, and we're doing the head counts that the left has always demanded, we need to have this many, this and this many that.
That some people really shouldn't be counted as black, or they shouldn't be counted as Latino.
Or perhaps shouldn't be counted as women if they're going to apply the test that way.
Because after all, you're really only contributing to diversity if you think the way we want you to think.
If you don't, you don't count.
And we will deny you your identity.
We'll suggest that your identity needs to be marked with an asterisk because you don't think the way the majority are supposed to think.
How bigoted is that?
So there's Michael Steele.
He may well be the Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Maryland next year.
How many Democrats, how many blacks are the Democrats going to put up for the United States Senate in any state in the Union?
They don't do that, and they're bothered by the fact that Republicans are not only willing to nominate a black to high office, but don't have all these tests and are willing to accept individuals as they come rather than put all these labels on.
And that's why I believe you're seeing a turn right now in the tactics of the left in which they are literally opening up the notion of questioning whether or not you are black enough or Hispanic enough if you dare to wander away from an ideology that we are imposing upon you.
My name is Mark Elling, and I'm sitting in for Rush.
Mark Belling sitting in for Rush.
I'm looking at CNN right now.
There's Anita Hill.
What?
Is she claiming that Alito harassed her too?
Are they bringing her back now for this?
To uh cell phone in Virginia, Ross, you're on EIB.
Hello?
Hi, Ross, you're on.
Uh hi, how are you?
I'm great, thank you.
Uh I just wanted to make a quick point.
Uh I'm a loyal uh uh Democrat, uh, and I but I do listen to Rush on a uh uh somewhat regular basis.
Uh I'm also a loyal Meet the Press uh watcher, and uh basically I mean I mean I mean basically what you're doing is you're distorting what happened on Meet the Press uh yesterday with Russard and Dean.
Did he apologize for the attacks on Steele?
Uh no, but Dean made it very clear when Rossard asked him, would you you know, would you tolerate this?
Dean said absolutely not.
He said I'd fire people like that, and Russ are.
Yeah, he did.
He threw he threw that out, but he would not do what he was asked to do, which was issue an apology.
And the fact of the matter is the attacks on Steel have been going on for some time.
I really think this is becoming an accepted tactic now of some American liberals.
▲
Export Selection