All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 16, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:26
November 16, 2005, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And welcome to the Rush Limbaugh Program here at the EIB Network at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I am Roger Hitchcock, broadcasting to you from the left coast today, KOGO Radio in San Diego, and chock full of news and issues you want to get into.
And of course, the number for you to be on the program, 1-800-282-2882.
Today, I want to talk a little bit about, well, let me start with last night's CMA Awards, and we'll get into the victory today over the United Nations.
This will make your day, so stand by for that news.
The Iraq Senate resolution, what is this all about, and where is this going?
In the subsequent portions of the program, let me give you a little preview here because I want you to stand by today.
There's a lot to do.
The Ninth Circus Court of Appeals, desperately in need of being broken up into several different circuits in order to get some control over this runaway rogue court, has now ruled that a sex survey for kids as young as first grade conducted by public schools need not have parental permission.
Wait till you hear the questions in the survey.
And is Lieutenant Governor Steele in Maryland getting a bad deal?
I mean, here is an African-American Republican running for the United States Senate, apparently being called vicious racist names by white Democrats, among others.
I guess the theme is that racism in the defense of liberalism is no vice, but we'll get to that later.
A little bit more on Gitmo as well and what's going on with the real Gitmo.
You know, there's two Gitmos.
Did you know this?
There are two Gitmos.
One you've heard a lot about, one you've heard nothing about.
We're going to change that today.
I want to talk about Walmart, the border, government horror stories.
We've got a lot of stuff coming up, and we want to get into it right away.
By the way, in this hour, too, a special emphasis on Russia's new Adopt a Soldier program.
Now, look, here's the idea.
Matching givers of a Rush 24-7 Limbaugh Letter combo subscription with our Armed Forces members, our warriors, stationed worldwide.
Now, if you're an active duty member of the U.S. military anywhere in the world, come to the RushLimbaugh.com page there and sign up for a subscription donated by one of our listeners.
So there you go.
And if you're a family member of an active duty military member and you want to do that, you can come to this form and sign up your soldier on their behalf.
Now, this has been mentioned a couple of times, apparently, this week, and has been overwhelming response at RushLimbaugh.com.
So again, for those of you who have gone in there to sponsor a warrior to the combo subscription combination here of Rush Limbaugh letter, the Limbaugh Letter, and the Rush 24-7 program, we want to tell you this is a great, great thing to do.
So details at the top of the homepage there at rushlimbaugh.com on the right-hand side.
And whether you want to give a gift or receive one.
So in this hour, of course, we're broadcast worldwide, as Rush pointed out last week, to armed forces stations worldwide, despite the opposition of many.
The demand is overwhelming for all three hours.
We get this one hour.
We're grateful for it, and we hope that you and the listening audience will do Russia's Adopt a Soldier program.
Now, last night at New York's Madison Square Garden, the Country Music Association Awards were held.
First time, I don't know, it was first time out of Nashville, first time in New York, usually in Nashville.
And some award winners that, you know, you don't think of New York as a country western, country music kind of place.
And yet, the fans there went completely crazy.
And the fact that this city, New York City, does not have a country station is unbelievable.
I bet they have a Spanish language station.
I mean, I don't know.
I'm in San Diego.
What do I know?
I bet you have 25 PBS stations at least, or 23, something in that order.
Do you have a country station?
Good grief.
Anyway, let's see.
Leanne Womack, one of the top winners there, Album of the Year for her, there's more where that came from.
Plus, single of the year for I May Hate Myself in the Morning, which sounds a little like this.
All right.
Pretty girl, too, Leanne Womack, and pretty wholesome-looking woman, Keith Urban, for his better life top winner as well there.
Keith Urban, of course, sounded a little like this.
You and me, we can dream as big as the sky.
I know it's hard to see it now, but maybe someday I'm going to lie.
We're going to fly.
This road we're on.
You know where I belong.
my faith is strong entertainer of the year On the Rush Show here.
Tribute to the Country Music Association and thank them for going to New York.
And a lot of sophisticated New Yorkers in that audience last night.
Don't need to name any names.
You saw the gossip columns this morning, and you know what I'm talking about.
Jersey Boy Gandalfini and others, Billy Joel and so forth there.
So kind of an interesting, fun night at Madison Square Garden.
Now, victory as the phone calls are rolling in here at 1-800-282-2882.
And you know how back in New York, you know how they have an edge on this screening thing?
I mean, I told them, you know, I want people on here who disagree with me.
I want people on who are going to get into a discussion.
Let's get it on here a little bit because the program is going to, despite its mellow opening here with a little country music, going to get an edge here pretty rapidly because we have a victory to report.
The World Summit on the Information Society was called by the United Nations to be held starting today in Tunis, Tunisia.
The World Summit on the Information Society.
The purpose of the World Summit on the Information Society was to take the U.S. government control of the Internet away from the United States and place it in the hands of United Nations bureaucrats with the creation of a new international forum to regulate the Internet.
Now, I need to go back because I said take it away from the U.S. government.
You know, if you are involved with the Internet, that the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, ICANN, I-C-A-N-N, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, is a nonprofit corporation set up by the government.
It's over in Marina Del Rey here in California that oversees the Internet's domain name system.
Now, it has a memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Commerce Department, but through a, I just, this has got to be the best fortune of our lives.
The Clinton administration in 1998, when this was set up, let it be a private corporation with very minimal Department of Commerce type interference.
Because it is private and grassroots, and on, you know, on the and this, but this goes back, I want to pay particular tribute to a guy named John Postel.
He's not around anymore.
He died in 1998.
But he was the real driving force behind the government staying out of the Internet, allowing the Internet to grow from the ground up, from individuals up, allowing the Internet to become this worldwide marketplace, this worldwide sharing of information, knowledge, ideas, pornography, bedding, casinos, whatever the heck.
You know what I'm saying?
So the United Nations, of course, and the tinpot dictators who find free flow of information to be a threat, and that's a lot of them, from Jacques Charat Shirak to mentally ill, Kim Mentally Ill Song, whatever his name is in North Korea.
So these folks, of course, find the free flow of information a tremendous threat to their power.
And they had, through the United Nations, a very big idea.
The idea was: well, this should be internationalized.
This shouldn't be under the thumb of a single individual member state, no matter how powerful it is, and no matter the fact that you invented it.
It is now time for you to internationalize the responsibility of the Internet.
All of that meant that China wanted to keep websites out that talked about freedom.
So that's where we were.
And today, a big victory.
The United Nations has backed off.
There will be no new bureaucracy.
ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, will continue.
And the 11,000 government, business, and civic leaders in Africa for the three-day summit are focusing instead on the digital divide.
Does this remind you of Al Gore?
On the digital divide between the haves and have-nots.
As computers come down in price, that's not the threat they really wanted to talk about.
The threat they really wanted to talk about was the Internet as a threat to tyranny.
And it couldn't be allowed.
Well, it is allowed.
It will continue.
The threat to tyranny will continue.
And it's one of the best things that's happened in our lifetime.
Huge good news.
It is, I think, even better than the news coming out of the Palestine-Israeli situation in which Condoleezza Rice went and did something that Madeleine Albright I don't think ever got done, which is to get the Palestinians and Israelis, knock a little head together, get them to agree to an agreement on how the free flow of goods and services are going to come, trade is going to come across and into Gaza and through Gaza to other parts of the Middle East world,
including Israel and the West Bank and other places.
And all of that sounded pretty good.
Now, of course, Hamas wants to use free trade to bring their rockets in and have training grounds for Hamas, terrorists, and blow up pizza parlors because that's what they trade in.
Now, see, we trade in a higher standard of living.
They trade in death.
Now, death is very popular in the Middle East.
We can't understand it over here because we're kind of what's kind of popular here is Keith Urban's song, you know, reaching for the stars, getting more out of things, having more, starting out poor and making it life, making a better world for your children.
See, we're hung up in that.
We're addicted to that sort of thing.
We're addicted to life and prosperity and freedom.
And it's just, I know it's ruining us.
But, you know, over there, they're addicted to death and the finality of the final solution.
They thought Hitler was right.
So those folks, you know, it's tough to get negotiations going between those two because they're kind of polar opposites.
But Condi Rice pulled it off, at least for the time being.
God bless her.
I'm Roger Hedgecock filling in for Rush back after this.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh, Only Excellence in Podcasting Network.
We're back on the Rush program.
Roger Hedgecock filling in for Rush Limbaugh today.
Well-earned vacation this week.
The rest of us get to get it on here at the EIB in the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
And of course, you know what the charge is.
Substitute doesn't just play a DVD, doesn't just talk about birds and bees.
No, no, no, no.
It doesn't just give out sex education questions to the first graders.
No, no.
We get to the issues of the day.
And your reaction to it, let's start with that reaction.
Here's Trey in Raleigh, North Carolina.
Hi, Trey.
Welcome to the Rush program.
Roger, hey, good to talk with you.
Thank you, sir.
Hey, here's what I see happening if the UN takes over the control of the Internet.
I could see them placing a sort of tax on companies that make a lot of money on the web.
So let's take Google, for example.
Bingo.
We all know how much money that they make.
Well, in order for Google to use their domain name, they probably only have to pay about $50 per year to use that domain name.
Correct.
Let's say if the UN takes over, they say, well, you're making X amount of dollars off this domain name.
We're going to up the price that we charge you to use this domain name.
It's the same thing as what they're doing in New Hampshire or wherever with the property tax.
If you've got a better view, then we're going to up your property tax by X amount.
Yeah, even if you're blind, you've got to pay for that view.
Hey, that's exactly right, Trey.
The next step after setting up the internationalization, the normalization of control over the Internet under Okofi Annan and the Bribes for Oil program, that bureaucracy no longer has any work to do since Saddam is gone.
So they're going to be morphed into the Internet bureaucracy and soak everybody trying to make some money on the Internet.
No question about it.
They were going for an independent taxing source so that American taxpayers and their annoying little questions about accountability would just be whisked away by Ko-fi and company.
Exactly.
And who would I complain to?
Nobody.
Today I can complain to my representatives in the U.S. that if my taxes are too high, I can complain to them.
But if I own a domain name, and then they're going to charge me, you know, 200, 400, 5,000%.
Whatever.
Yeah, because, you know, who am I going to complain to?
Tray, nobody.
Thanks for the call.
You're absolutely right.
Aaron in Charleston, West Virginia, is it?
Aaron, go ahead.
Well, my point was that the U.N. should be able to control Every aspect of the internet with respect to every nation be able to control what is seen and what is not seen.
You're kidding, right?
No, I'm not kidding.
I'm being totally serious because as far as China and other countries, they've almost become as powerful as the United States or almost on the same level.
What does that have to do with each nation being able to restrict the free flow of information and goods and services that the web has now?
Because the Chinese try to do that now.
They try to get into agreements, for instance, with Yahoo and other companies, content-serving companies, and they try to say to them, look, you can come into China and you can make millions of dollars, but you can't have any website that talks about freedom or the Falun Gong or any of those other issues that we don't like to hear about.
We just are going to censor.
And these American companies have been agreeing to this, which has been irritating me all the way along.
Allowing the government of China to actually register domain names and decide in their tyrannical wisdom which domain names are going to be accessible to their citizens and which not would be a huge setback to the democracy movement and liberty movement in China.
Well, you have to understand the culture of China.
I don't have to understand anything beyond the idea that tyranny is bad and freedom is good.
Well, you kind of have a jaded view of the whole situation.
Well, no, I have a traditional view.
My traditional view is that freedom is good, tyranny is bad.
I'm sorry, it goes back to my ancestors in the 18th century.
I have to admit, I'm saddled with it.
I am addicted to it.
It is a problem for me to be addicted to freedom like this, Aaron.
What are you addicted to?
What you're doing is compiling the situation totally into freedom.
You're not dealing with the actual issue of the Internet and actually taking it in the context of a culture.
Allowing a country to restrict the flow of information and goods and services presently on the Internet in the interest of maintaining their tyranny is exactly what I'm talking about.
I don't think it has that much to do with tyranny because why are so many U.S. senators and so many corporations giving so much money to China as far as dealing with the steel industry and pumping so much money into the China economy that they deserve a right to be able to restrict what's on the Internet?
So you're in favor of censorship.
I'm not in favor of censorship.
That's what it is.
In this case, it makes more sense than anything else you're saying.
Censorship makes sense.
Okay, thank you for your views, Aaron.
We appreciate you being on the Rush program.
1-800-282-2882.
Liberals for censorship.
The group is forming here on the right.
Your meeting time is 7:30.
It will not be confused with the Bible study class.
Now, Bush is in Japan, by the way, and President Bush is in Japan and giving a tremendous, I guess this particular speech was in Korea.
He's bopping around out there in Asia and giving a really interesting message.
Here is an American president, the superpower of the world, giving a speech in which, well, among other things, he says this.
The 21st century will be freedom century for all Koreans.
And one day every citizen of that peninsula will live in dignity and freedom and prosperity at home.
Wow.
Kim Jong mentally ill, take a note of that one.
Freedom, prosperity.
Are you kidding?
This is going to be new to the North Korean regime.
So this is what Bush has been saying.
Taiwan, he said to the Beijing government, to the tyrants in Beijing, he said, Taiwan has democracy and freedom and twice the economic prosperity that you will ever have.
And because of that freedom, you ought to emulate Taiwan instead of trying to absorb it, instead of trying to conquer it, instead of trying to use it as a pawn in your imperial ambitions.
This is a president worth listening to, even though many don't.
We will after this.
Roger Hedgecock in for Rush Limbaugh.
Famous Washington Post editor Bob Woodward has now testified that a senior Bush administration official, not Scooter Libby, told him about CIA operative Valerie Plame a month before her identity was publicly exposed.
In other words, what Mr. Fitzgerald, the prosecutor, said that Scooter Libby was the first official to give this information to a reporter doesn't sound right if Bob Woodward is right, and there's always that question.
Valerie Plame, apparently, has said that she learned of her covert status from Mr. Woodward, so now things are completely confused.
Here's Vincent in Lawrenceville, Virginia.
Vincent, welcome to the program.
Hi there.
How are you doing?
Okay, what's up?
My comment was with saying as how the UN has not been able to manage anything successfully with the oil for food program.
Why is it even an issue for them to be involved in managing the internet?
Well, of course, it's only an issue because the Tim Pod dictators around the world who control the General Assembly and Kofi Annan wanted control over something that was a threat, just like they want control over everything.
Mugabe in Africa wants control of the food supply because an independent food supply is a threat to his regime.
These are people who everything is a threat to them because they're paranoid dictators.
They run the assembly of the United Nations.
They are the majority vote because they're aided and abetted by people like China, Russia, and France.
That's what the UN's all about.
Right.
Well, I can see this turning into just a big tunnel of espionage if we let them handle it, in my opinion.
Yep, that's another ⁇ that is absolutely right.
And another downside of this whole UN thing is that we're already getting ⁇ the Chinese already have a war plan that's based on hacking Pentagon computers, command control, and supply and all the rest of it, and our satellites as well.
They are big.
In fact, the viruses and some of the problems we've had on the net over the last number of years are traceable to Chinese efforts to learn about and penetrate our computer systems and our Internet.
And the nets that are used by the Pentagon.
So this is, you know, there's nothing new here about this.
The United Nations is a part and parcel of the worldwide effort, and it's pretty nakedly open and available to see people who would like to tear down the United States in order that their little feudal tyrannies, like North Korea and Cuba and so forth, will be protected against justice and freedom for their people.
And that's what that's about, Vincent.
I appreciate the call.
Steve in Miami next.
Hi, Steve.
Hi, how are you doing?
Good.
Welcome to the Russ Show.
Thank you.
I was just listening briefly about the whole discussion.
I've been following the story myself.
And basically, you know, the idea that China can restrict traffic, that's regardless if the U.S. holds the control over the name servers or not.
Networking has the ability to restrict traffic to or from specific addresses regardless of who is actually maintaining the service.
Only if that country controls all the portals.
And sometimes they do and sometimes they don't.
Sometimes they can and sometimes they can't.
If the Chinese set up their own portal, you know, they set up their own routers.
They can block that traffic and they have that ability.
My point is that since the Internet is a global resource at this point, yes, the United States created it.
Yes, we put a lot of effort into it.
We have built the infrastructure.
But at this point, it is part of the global community.
And as it is right now, people in other countries have to come to us to arbitrate any differences of opinions.
Now, that, of course, gives us a leverage against all these other countries.
I'm not saying that we should release the country.
No, no, there's no leverage.
No, Steve, don't even put that out over the air.
That's just not correct.
There's no leverage over countries.
ICANN is an autonomous private sector corporation that regulates only the names.
You can't go in there, for instance, and say, I want to be google.com because that's already taken, okay?
ICANN has this kind of copyright function that they perform.
Other than that, there is no leverage over countries.
Countries don't have, well, I guess they do have sites, but in other words, you can't go and get malaysia.com or malaysia.gov because that's already taken.
There's a country that has that.
And somebody has to be the referee for those things.
But beyond that, there's no leverage.
Well, as I was telling your screener, that doesn't exist at this point.
As far as I know, we're not using it in that manner.
But the potential does exist.
I'm sorry, Steve, what doesn't exist?
The idea of using the name servers or controlling the names and numbers as leverage against somebody else.
Thank you very much for making my point, which is there is no leverage against other countries now, and that's not the purpose.
The United States government deliberately distanced itself through the Commerce Department, deliberately set up a private corporation, deliberately did not get the government involved in this.
That's why it's successful.
That's why the Internet is so powerful.
That's why it's such an engine for change in terms of cheaper goods and services.
And believe me, I was the last guy.
I was the last guy to give my credit card over the Internet until I was absolutely assured by my very young son, who knows 10 times more about this than I do, that this is going to work, that I was okay, that I was protected.
And I'm not still sure I am, but I am darn sure I'm getting cheaper stuff.
I'm getting a lot cheaper stuff by going and searching worldwide for it on the Internet.
And I just don't think at this point, with the greatest engine of individual liberty and freedom and prosperity that we've ever had globally, the greatest engine for that is the Internet.
It's not the United Nations.
It's not France.
It's the Internet.
Okay?
If that isn't clear to everybody, we can get into that discussion.
But because this hour goes to the armed forces, I want to get back to Iraq.
Because maybe I should just make this as simple as possible.
Not only have the Democrats denied...
See, the only defense you have against liberals is a memory.
If you can remember 1998, then you know that Harry Reid today, or even 2002, Harry Reid today, Senator Reid, is lying when he says that Bush lied about the war because what Bush has said about the war before and during and after in Iraq was the same thing Harry Reid was saying.
As of last Monday, on Harry Reid's website, he was saying that Saddam, according to the best intelligence estimates at the time of their vote to endorse the war, had weapons of mass destruction.
It's inconceivable that they're going to get away with a lie because enough of us have not everybody, I understand, because the recent graduates of public school have that bread and educated it out of their mind.
And to prove my point, on my local show, I had this math teacher, sixth-grade math teacher, who said it was child abuse to ask students to memorize the times tables.
And when I told him that around the dinner table when we were young, my dad would say, okay, what's 8 times 8?
You know, in the middle of eating my peas, or actually the dessert, or whatever it was I actually wanted to eat.
And my dad would say, what's 8 times 8?
And if I didn't know 64, I mean, there was some hard times there.
So was it child abuse?
No, it was memory.
Memory, you can't have a memory and believe in liberalism because memory will serve you to understand that liberals will say anything.
And of course, over the period of time, they look like they're flopping around like fish on a dock here, recently caught, trying to figure out what to say next to get a little inch of political power.
So let me make this completely clear about Iraq.
The United States has a strategy in Iraq.
There are four parts.
Number one, kill terrorists.
Number two, train Iraqi forces to kill terrorists.
Number three, help the Iraqis build schools and infrastructure and an oil system that they benefit from.
And number four, leave behind the first democracy in the Arab world and bid adios or whatever it is in Arabic and go home.
We say adios in this part of the country.
I don't know about you guys, but in Minnesota, you'll be saying adios just next year.
So here's the deal on the strategy.
It's pretty clear.
Now, do I have a criticism of this?
Yes, of course I do.
It is unclear to me that our commander-in-chief has communicated that this is a strategy for victory.
It's not a strategy for exit.
It's not a strategy, as Dick Cheney says, we may be there 20 years.
Look, Dick, if we're going to be there 20 years, you grab an M16 and go over there with your helmet and you go through the villages for the next 20 years.
20 years is not, and when he said, I thought it was the most unfortunate thing I've heard in this whole debate.
It is not necessary.
It is not required to get bogged down here in Iraq.
We are on the path to victory.
We are cleaning out the terrorists.
We're putting Iraq and Syria on notice, although more could be done there.
Why are there sanctuaries?
Why are there a sanctuary for Iraqi terrorists and Jordanian terrorists in Syria?
I've never figured that out, but you know, I'll have some trust and faith.
But I'll tell you what.
We need a victory strategy in this country.
We need a president articulating victory, not exit.
Victory will give us peace.
Exit will give us terrorism.
Every country that has backed down to the terrorists, every country that has tried to appease, has tried to understand, has tried to connect with the Islamic world, has gotten a bloody nose.
Now, I know in France they burn cars.
It's kind of a weekend hobby thing.
And I understand by the AP reporting that about 100 cars are burned on any given Saturday in France anyway.
They must be a very active Sierra Club chapter there in France.
But this is, you know, they only burn the big cars.
This is a, now has gotten to, you know, 4,200 cars, and it's getting old.
But this is what's going to happen in any country that shows weakness, that shows weakness to these Islamic fascist terrorists who need to be killed.
Otherwise, they will kill you.
Now, I go a little slower here because I know you're not getting this in any other media outlet, but let me just be clear about the strategy.
It's good as far as it goes.
Number one, kill terrorists.
Number two, train Iraqi forces to kill terrorists.
Number three, help Iraqis build their schools and infrastructure, including oil.
And number four, leave behind the first democracy in the Arab world.
Let me emphasize that.
The first and only democracy in the Arab world.
The first and only democracy in the Arab world, and one of the few in the entire Islamic world.
So what are we there for?
We're there to make a difference.
We're there to change the world.
We're there to defeat the Islamic expansionist terrorist group who think it's okay now to even kill their own.
How debased are these people to walk into a wedding of Muslims in Amman Jordan and blow them up and figure that's the cool thing to do?
No, it isn't.
It's barbaric, uncivilized murder.
And nothing in the Quran sanctions it.
Nothing.
So there you are.
So we can talk about that as well.
But I wanted our troops to hear it, that if anything, on the conservative side, on the constitutionalist side, the commander-in-chief has the authority of Congress to pursue not just a pressure or an exit strategy or a police action or a nation building or any of that other United Nations-like vocabulary.
We have the sole and only responsibility to produce a victory in Iraq and then come home.
And by the way, while we're at it, why don't we come home since we had the victory in distant memory in Germany, Japan, Italy, and other places?
Why don't we bring those troops home too?
Please.
Where is the indignation about the 65-year occupation of Germany?
Bring the troops home.
I'm Roger Hitchcock, filling in for Rush, back with your call after this.
Meanwhile, in Blue State America, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, four of the local state legislators in that state, State Senator Cynthia Cream, State Senator Robert O'Leary, Representative Michael Festa, and Representative David Linsky in the state legislature in Massachusetts, have introduced Senate Bill 938.
Senate Bill 938 would repeal an ancient statute of the Commonwealth forbidding, quote, abominable and detestable crime against nature, either with mankind or with a beast.
In other words, it would repeal sex with animals.
This seems to be high on the agenda.
I don't know whether this is high on the agenda of normal people in Massachusetts, but these state legislators responding to the crisis in bestiality have because it's just unfair.
Animals have a right to a sex life with humans too, don't they?
I mean, I try to understand these people and their logic.
Can you imagine we're now going?
Well, the measure would technically keep bestiality illegal, but reduce the penalties for those convicted of, quote, a sexual act on an animal, unquote, which used to be up to 20 years in prison to much less than that.
Apparently, an internship in PETA would be on offer there if you're sentenced to bestiality.
Where's PETA when you need him?
Stuff like this.
Here's Dan in Glendale, Oregon on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi, Dan.
Hey, how are you?
Good.
Hey, I just wanted to make a comment which I'm sure you're going to eventually get to, and that is that I believe the Democrats are going to implode on themselves.
And I believe Bush is going to come out way ahead in this whole issue of the Iraq war because he always, and I mean always, takes the moral high ground.
He doesn't pick on his enemies by name.
He seems to always stay above the fray.
And he also cares about the outcome.
And because of that, I just believe he's going to come out okay.
And even though his numbers are down, I believe he's going to be great by the time his term is up.
Well, I hope so.
And then there are some signs, certainly some signs of that.
But I guess what I'm trying to say today, while supporting the First Principles route and, as you say, keeping to it, sticking to it, and not getting down in the trenches and down in the mud fight, mud wrestling pit with Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, I understand all that, and I think that's good.
What I don't understand is having a victory attitude.
We have this attitude like we just have to slog it through, and no matter how long it takes, and it could take 20 years and blah, blah, blah.
That's not what we need.
We won World War II in four years and defeated a worldwide alliance, the Axis alliance.
We defeated the Communists took a lot longer, but Ronald Reagan finally got down to it in eight years.
This is something that needs to be done in a period of time where we have a national call to victory, a national plan for victory, and we aim at victory.
That's what I'm concerned about.
Well, don't you think the insidiousness of the whole terror network, because it's global and especially since it's international, especially in the Middle East, it doesn't really know a border.
Don't you think it's impossible to kind of push for a victory in that sense, knowing that you're not done once you're done with Iraq?
No, because no, I don't agree with that at all, Dan, and I'll tell you why.
Because I believe that in Iraq we have drawn all of the Islamo fascists to this showdown.
This is the okay chorale, okay?
Iraq is the showdown.
And once it's defeated, the death mentality, the cult of death, is defeated in Iraq.
It will be defeated everywhere because other nations will not allow that thing to fester in their country, just like Jordan won't.
The new government of Syria won't.
The Iranians are going to find another way to be powerful and influential without having to bow to Al-Qaeda.
The Pakistanis won't.
In other words, there's going to be a revulsion against hosting this kind of extremism if that's the net result.
That is, the United States does come in and liberate the country, and the people actually run it instead of these dictators.
So, Dan, I think victory is imperative and is doable, and is doable in a shorter period of time than I think George Bush is talking about.
We need this cumbersome bureaucracy of the federal government to get with it and to win this war and to have a declared victory strategy.
I'm not interested in exiting until we've won.
I'm not interested in exiting 20 years from now either.
We're taking a break.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, back after this.
Welcome back to the Rush Show.
A little long in that segment.
I'm Roger Hedgecock.
We'll be doing next hour, the sex survey for kids.
Parents need not be concerned.
Lieutenant Governor Steele, what they're saying about him, and the real gitmo.
By the way, if you went to see Jersey Boys, that originated out here out of La Jolla, California.
They love it in New York.
▲
Export Selection