All Episodes
Previous Next
Nov. 21, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:21
November 21, 2005, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
The views expressed by the host on this show make more sense than anything anybody else out there happens to be saying because the views expressed by the host on this program are rooted in a daily relentless unstoppable pursuit of the truth You ought to have courage to face the truth if you're going to listen to this program and be a leftist otherwise you'll go nuts 800-282-2882 the email address is rush at eibnet.com is a An air emergency going on.
It's been going on for the past hour and a half out near Portland, Oregon, actually Hillsboro, Oregon.
The Nike corporate jet, a Gulfstream 5, has a landing gear problem.
The right side gear, the main gear on the right side, is just barely showing the nose gear and the left side wings main gear is both down.
They've got a problem.
They're flying around burning off fuel now.
They're also on the phone with Gulfstream mechanics trying to figure out a procedure for lowering that gear.
Now, frankly, this kind of surprises me because there's so much redundancy on these Gulfstreams that it amazed me.
I remember flying EIB-1 from here to Los Angeles like three years ago.
And we had a slow hydraulic fuel leak, hydraulic system leak.
And we had to turn around.
We weren't going to turn around over Louisiana and get back.
And we were going to run out of hydraulics before we got back.
And so pilots come back, explain a situation to me, and I said, what if we run out?
We can't get the gear down.
Don't worry about the gear.
There are two redundancies to blow the gear down.
And they showed me the system up in the cockpit that gets the gear down even without hydraulics.
Now, I don't know what this doesn't look like a hydraulic problem because they're able to fly the airplane, but there's a system that blows those gear down even without hydraulics.
And apparently that one didn't work.
But there's so much redundancy here.
The thing is just stuck.
And you can't retract the gear individually.
You can't retract the left side main gear so that only the nose gear is down.
You can put them all down or all up.
And I know they're on the phone with Gulfstream trying to figure out a way to get that gear down.
Now, some of these networks are showing pictures that are not Gulfstreams right now.
But it's a great jet.
It's 13 hours non-stop.
It'll go from Tokyo to New York and back non-stop, not round-trip non-stop, but it's a great airplane.
Well, we got back with no problem.
The redundant system lowered the gear, worked.
I forget how it was explained to me, but it was comparable.
When the guys went to the moon, they landed on the moon and they had to launch from the moon to get back up to the orbiting capsule.
And of course, they had to test that engine.
I mean, you get one chance to fire that engine when you're on the moon.
And they had to come up with a no-fail engine, a no-fail switch, because you can't fire the switch and it not work on the moon.
I mean, it's got to work.
And they must have fired this engine in tests, you know, hundreds of thousands of times before they installed it and put it in.
And I was told that it's a similar type thing.
It's almost like a vacuum switch.
I forget the description, but it blows the gear down even without hydraulics.
You can use it once, but it never fails.
And it didn't that time.
And what was funny because you have to declare an emergency coming in.
We had all these fire trucks and police officers and flashing lights following us down the runway.
I said, oh, no, I don't want that.
But it was easily repaired inside of three hours and went back on our way.
We reloaded the hydraulic fluid and went back on our way.
So I've been watching this eagerly, trying to figure out what in the world they can do to get that gear down.
And there's got to be something.
Because if they can't, they're going to have to land on that right wing.
And that's where the fuel tanks are, right-side and left-side wings.
That's why they're burning off as much of it as they can, just flying in circles.
And they're doing flybys so that people on the ground can get a close look at that right-side main gear to see if see that one thing they could try is retracting it again, retracting all three and then lowering.
But I'm sure they might be afraid to do that in the event that they got two down.
That's better than none.
And if they get them back up and then none lower, if there's a problem with the whole mechanism.
And I'm just guessing.
I'm wild guessing on this, like everybody else is.
We'll just wait and see what happens.
But they're working on it even as we speak.
And the news has been saying landing is imminent for the past two hours.
Well, it is imminent.
I mean, they're going to have to come down at some point because they will run out of jet A up there.
But we've been led to believe it's things going to happen in the next two minutes.
And it hasn't.
But it will.
There's also, you could try to come down.
No, they won't do that.
I was going to say you could try to come down on grass, but that'd be, we'll just wait and see what they do.
Time for a C.
I told you so.
This from the Houston Chronicle.
Katrina now threatens New Orleans election.
The city has a lot of hurdles to clear and not much time before the February 4th vote.
With most of its residents living in storm-imposed exile across the country, hundreds of polling places destroyed, a scarcity of election workers.
New Orleans is an election planner's nightmare.
But in three months, the ghostly city is scheduled to elect a mayor, a sheriff, and the entire city council.
State and local election officials say a massive vote-by-mail program could effectively provide access for all voters, regardless of location, but the hurdles are daunting.
Goes on to talk that what this is really all about is that the Democrats in Louisiana are panicked because all of these residents, quote-unquote, enforced exile.
I just wonder how many of them are forced exile and how many of them don't want to come back.
But regardless, most of them are Democrats.
And the Democrats in Louisiana are worried sick that there are not going to be enough Democrat votes to affect Democrat victories in Louisiana.
But I'll tell you what, I won't be surprised if on Election Day, somehow the Democrat National Committee finds corporate jets and chartered jets to fly all over this country to pick up New Orleans voters and bring them back to the state to vote.
Heaven forbid they would only hold elections to the people who actually live there.
No, no, no, no.
We've got to go find all the people that used to live here and let them vote, so forth and so on.
I got to play a little audio soundbite for you here.
This is from reliable sources yesterday on CNN.
Howard Kurtz is talking to New York Times columnist columnist Maureen Dowd who wrote, Are Men Really Necessary?
And Howard's question was this.
When you write something about George W. Bush or Dick Cheney or Donald Rumsfeld and some of your critics out there decide to take you on, whether it's Rush Limbaugh or Friedman or David Brooks, anybody else, do you feel it's done in a more personal way than if you were Tom Friedman or David Brooks or a male columnist?
I write about this in the book.
I do.
It does bother me when I write about WMD or serious issues or even the problem of that the Times had in the case of Judith Miller and then and then Andrea Piser Rush Limbaugh just immediately switches and said, well, she's dated so-and-so.
That is not a logical transition.
I don't care if they take me on and disagree with my positions, but to go straight to my love life when I'm writing about issues of war and faking the war is not really logical.
Excuse me, but logic and women, that's a mistake many men make.
The second thing is, who is it that brings up her love life all the time?
Who is it that's essentially written a book about it?
It's Maureen Dowd.
Now, when she wrote that piece on Judith Miller, I mean, when she's basically accusing Judith Miller of sleeping with all of her sources, which is what the piece was, I mean, all I said about that was, hey, forget this written word stuff.
Call Vince McMahon, have him set up a ring, and let these two go at it.
Now, I have, when I talk about Maureen Dowd, it pretty much is restricted to the things that she has commented on in her piece.
But when she's talked about that essay or that excerpt from her book that ran in the New York Times Sunday magazine, what else is there to comment on it?
But are men necessary, sex and all this stuff?
And it's quite natural to wonder somebody who has the attitudes that she has she been deeply hurt.
See, I have confidence.
I shouldn't say this.
I know I shouldn't say this, but I have confidence that, how can I say this?
My instincts, I'm not going to follow my instincts here because it would be totally misunderstood.
But I just, I have, I think I could show her the right way.
I think I could redirect her.
I think she's just hanging around the wrong kind of guys.
really do i i she's she's she she obviously she she she needs she she needs no i i know what she needs and she's not getting it uh from from the from the from the clowns that she's running around with she's She's running around with these emasculated guys who are trying to be what they think she wants them to be.
And she just written a book about how she hates that.
Feminism is something that misled a lot of women.
It had false promises.
that didn't tell him the truth about certain things.
She just...
Let's just say I'm pretty confident I could change her perspective on all of this.
I was going to use the word tame, but you people wouldn't have understood it.
Back in just a second.
You're listening to Rush Limbaugh on the Excellence in Podcasting Network.
I want to thank Eileen Milliken, subscriber at Rush 24-7, for reminding me what it was that can blow the landing gear down when you've lost hydraulics.
And it's a nitrogen bottle.
It is called a blowdown, and it's a nitrogen bottle, nitrogen pressed, compressed nitrogen.
You flow the switch and it forces the gear down and then locks them.
And once you do that, you have to reset the system before it happens again.
That's what happens after a hydraulic failure.
I mentioned this is not a hydraulic failure.
They're able to steer the airplane.
So whether the feature would work here, and obviously it won't, or they would have done it and gotten that gear down.
So I was just relating an experience that I had that was somewhat like this, although not this bad.
Got an email.
Rush, were you scared?
I can't explain it, folks, but nothing about being in an airplane has ever scared me, nor will it ever.
Pilots came back and said, we've got a hydraulic leak.
We've got to turn around.
I said, okay.
And I told a flight attendant, can get dinner up here now.
I ate a little earlier than I thought because we only had about 45 minutes to get back.
And I started making arrangements for a backup airplane to get me out of Los Angeles when we landed.
Now, you put me in the ocean and put me in water and I have a whole different attitude about it.
But something about being in an airplane around airplanes, it never has scared me.
And not even that did.
Because pilots came back and said, it's no problem.
We'll just use this nitrogen bottle there that's got this pressure.
Blow those things down.
It will be cool.
Here's Melissa, Las Vegas.
Melissa, glad you called.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hello.
Good morning, Rush.
Hi.
Hi.
You know what?
I've got Angela from Austin.
She just, you know what, I'm so sick of people whining about this war and what our military is doing when she should be on her knees thanking God for them, thanking God for their families who support them and the freedom to be able to call you in line.
Well, what is it that really aggravates you about them, though?
Isn't it their ignorance?
Yes, you know what?
It really is because, you know what, the media isn't showing up.
My nephew, one of my nephews, was in Iraq.
He actually re-upped and he came home.
He actually sent letters home and said how irritated he was and upset with the media and the other military people he knew was because the women were able to walk around knowing they weren't going to get raped.
Children could go to school.
Things that we take for granted.
That somebody can walk in our house any second, take my daughter and rape her or kill my child just because they decide they want to kill him.
Well, no, you're illustrating another point, and that is that these people never talk about the barbarians that are our enemy.
They never talk about their evil.
They never talk about how rotten they are.
And the reason they don't is because they were perfectly nice, wonderful, normal people until Bush came along and started torturing everybody and made all these terrorists.
Now, there are people who believe this.
That's why I told Angela, I can't relate to a thing you're saying.
It does not compute with me.
I don't know how you can intellectually believe it.
I know how you can.
I'm sorry, it's because you showed it.
As a mother, I'm a mother.
When I was younger, I kind of thought that way too.
Because I grew up during the Vietnam time.
I thought, oh, this is a terrible thing.
Now that I'm older, though, and I see things differently, especially as a parent, knowing that my child, my children, I have more than one, my children are running around out there, and they have that freedom to go to school, go to church where they want to go to church, live where they want to live at one time, marry who they want, children, all those things that we take for granted.
And I really do blame the media for most of this because they're not telling us the other side of the story.
And it's not fair to our military.
They're going to come home and be treated like the Vietnam vets were treated, and that is so wrong.
Well, that's not going to happen.
In the first place, the mainstream press does not have a monopoly anymore, and they're not going to get away with this.
We're not going to lose.
We're not going to bring the true troops home in the context of losing and admitting defeat.
It isn't going to happen.
Also, I don't necessarily totally agree with you that it's just because Angela's young and that she is naive.
There are plenty of adults, and many of them are professors with tenure at America's institutions of higher learning, and they believe the same stuff.
They are just, they are arrogant elitists.
They think they know it all, and they're nothing but a bunch of eggheads, and they don't know but 10% of the story.
They believe what fits into their worldview.
And if you understand arrogance and elitism and ego, we're smarter than everybody else, then you have a better chance of understanding who these people are.
Then they get their little followers that traipse along after them who really think that they're just being big-hearted and holding high ideals and this sort of thing.
And it's frustrating as it can be because it doesn't intellectually make sense.
And everybody thinks to get through to somebody, you got to get through to them intellectually to make them understand, change their mind or something.
And with some of these people, it just isn't this way.
Most Americans do not understand.
They just will not systematically understand why other Americans think their country is evil, why other Americans think their country is rotten, why other Americans think their country is guilty, why other Americans think their country deserves to lose.
That just doesn't compute.
People, as you have just expressed, who have an appreciation for the bounty and the freedom and the opportunity in this country simply don't relate to people who see this country as the root of all evil.
But believe me, they are out there and they are largely teaching your kids, primarily in college, but in other places too, in high school.
It's hideous.
Here's Dave in Stowe, Ohio.
You're next, sir.
Nice to have you on the program.
Hey, Rush.
Good to talk to you again.
Thank you, sir.
Now, I just, I had to call.
I heard your first hour, and then I had to go to class.
But I heard the, you know, you were talking about the whole the Iraqi people wanting us there.
And I have to take issue with the fact that that poll that they're constantly bringing up of 80% don't want us there.
I have to take issue with that because that wasn't my experience.
I mean, one of us.
What poll is this?
80% of the Iraqi people don't want us there?
There's a poll out there that says that.
Well, I heard it was something off BBC.
I know I was listening to.
Oh, the BBC.
The BBC is as worthless as CBC.
But I've heard Democrats also use it.
Of course you will.
And I just got to take issue because the mainstream media just flaunts it.
And I actually had experiences where when we were pulling out and another American unit was coming in.
But, I mean, those who have something to lose were very upset.
And actually, there were some guys that actually got teary-eyed by the fact that we were leaving.
There was an air of uncertainty, and they were just so upset that I think as time progresses, if more and more Iraqis become successful, then by all means, more and more Iraqis will want us to stay.
Well, you know, this is nonsense.
Now, I haven't been to Iraq, but I've been to Afghanistan.
And I know that in Afghanistan, they are paranoid that we're going to leave.
And I have to think the Iraqis are trying to set up a new government, a new country.
They're trying to establish a nation that is rooted in a form of democracy.
Their actions do not follow a bunch of people who wish we would leave.
It's non-sequitur.
It doesn't make any sense.
And the people out there saying it have the same bias as the things that they're saying about this country being guilty.
I'd ignore it all.
All right, I want to take you back, folks.
I want to take you back to the CIA leak case.
And I want to take you back to very early after the, even before the indictment of Scooter Libby.
And I want you to remember, well, I'll tell you in case you don't remember, what was the thing I said I thought this case would end up being?
This case is going to be the worst thing the media ever asked for because they're going to be subpoenaed and they're going to be put on the witness stand.
The defense is going to ask for them.
The defense is going to want to ask a whole bunch of reporters a whole bunch of questions.
Patrick Fitzgerald did not.
He only asked them questions about one specific area and promised to respect their privacy on that.
He didn't want to, he didn't want, as a representative of the government, he was willing to put Judith Miller in jail because she was acting in contempt.
But he offered them all kinds of flexibility.
Yes, I'll only ask you about this one thing.
Well, the defense is not limited by that.
And I said, before this whole thing with Woodward came up, I said, you wait.
This is going to be the worst nightmare that the media has ever seen themselves become part of.
Then last week, when I am away out of the country, not even, I mean, not even possible to be bothering anybody here, Bob Woodward all of a sudden announced, hey, you know what?
I found out from a government official it wasn't Libby before Libby supposedly told Judy Miller.
Now everybody's running around, well, who was Woodward's source?
And it's focusing on Richard Armitage.
Rumsfeld has denied it.
Rice has denied it.
A number of people have denied it.
Richard Armitage, number two at the State Department when Colin Powell was there, has not denied it.
He has been a source, I'm told, anyway, for Woodward on previous Woodward books.
Woodward was out there saying, and he knew about this two years.
He's out there on television.
This investigation has much ado about nothing.
Woodward, and I happen to think Woodward's still right.
I think Woodward's right about this.
I think Woodward's known all along that this was just an item of gossip.
You know, Wilson's wife works at the CIA.
It wasn't a big plan by the administration to destroy Wilson's credibility or expose Valerie Playman.
It was just a gossip item.
And Woodward's known it all along, and he's on television.
He's on Larry King Alive.
He's on wherever he goes on television, really ridiculing the investigation and saying it's overblown.
It's overdone.
There's much ado about nothing.
Then something came along that compelled Woodward, Woodward's source actually, hey, wait a minute.
We just had a guy indicted here under a false premise.
And I got to go for it.
So the source asked Woodward for a release, vice versa, something like that.
And Woodward says, okay, well, the source says, I'll tell the prosecutor, but you can't tell anybody who I am.
So Woodward goes last week and testifies for two hours.
The prosecutor, now Woodward is finding out what it's like to be an enemy of the mainstream press.
Now, they just don't know what to make of this.
How could their hero, Bob Woodward of Watergate, how could he be involved in this?
How could Bob Woodward be doing this?
We had it all lined up.
We're going to get Libby, and then we're going to get Cheney, and then we're going to get Bush, and then we're going to get Rove.
And Woodward's come along and screwed it all up.
Now it's gotten to the point where the Washington Post ombudsman wrote a piece in yesterday's paper savaging Woodward, savaging the paper.
How dare he be allowed to operate under different pretenses?
He's just a reporter here like everybody else is.
And there's an actual line in there.
Just because he's rich and famous doesn't mean he gets special treatment.
And I'm just rubbing my hands together in glee because Woodward is not a conservative.
He's not a Republican.
And yet he's been tarred and feathered now with the rich and famous line.
And all these people at the Washington Post, see, what Woodward's been allowed to do, he's allowed to go out and report on all these stories, but he can save his stuff.
It doesn't have to go into paper.
He can save it for his books, where he makes Boku millions.
Whereas these gumshare reporters have to go out, dig up the dirt, turn it over to the editors, and it gets in the paper, and they make their measly 80 or 100 grand a year.
Measly compared to what Woodward's making with his books.
Woodward's also allowed to make up quotes from CIA directors who are in a coma and be paid for that, as in the William Casey scenario.
So now we have a mess of an investigation and we've got, we have.
We have a prosecutor, mr Fitzgerald, who ought to be a little shaken up by this, because it's clear, it's clear to me that this prosecutor accepted as gospel everything Joe Wilson was saying and his wife.
It is clear that there was no, no challenge of them, because a whole bunch of people would have been subpoenaed, but he never was.
Whole bunch of people could have been subpoenaed but never were.
Wilson and Plame weren't.
I guess they weren't put under oath to find out whether they were telling the truth or not.
Now, the whole reason, the whole reason that Scooter Libby was in the crosshairs, this, and i'm not saying I know he's been indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice, but don't forget that big press conference on friday afternoon when the independent counsel, despite that, was going on and on and on about how dangerous it is to out a CIA agent's identity and it's going to discourage others from joining the intelligence services, and despite the fact that Libby was not indicted for that the miss.
You couldn't avoid the conclusion, a prosecutor really wanted everybody to think that that's what Libby was in trouble for.
Well, now we find out that Libby was not the first government official to tell a reporter the identity of Valerie Plame.
Bob Woodward's, out there, knew it a month before Novak's column appeared and so the special prosecutor had to go get a new grand jury and talk to Woodward.
Woodward had to apologize to the paper.
You got to love this now I said, I just want to remind you and this is not a see, I told you so I'm just I'm telling you this.
This whole case, this trial, is going to end up going places where the press had no idea they thought this trial was going to end up proving that there were lies about intelligence going into Iraq and even when the independent counsel, Patrick Fitzgerald even at that famous Friday press conference he made a point saying this, for those of you interested in the war one way or the other, this indictment's not about the war.
It has nothing to do with the war made it crystal clear, didn't matter.
Democrats, media still said that's what this was all about.
Now Woodward's thrown all of that out the window and so we get this story in the NEW YORK Times November 16th, while I was away.
It's by Eric Lichtblau, journalist said to figure in strategy in leak case.
Well see, it just proves you don't need the NEW YORK Times folks, all you need is me.
Lawyers for Lewis Libby, the former White House official indicted on perjury charges, planned to seek testimony from journalists beyond those cited in the indictment and will probably challenge government agreements limiting their grand jury testimony, people involved in the case said Tuesday.
A lawyer close to the defense, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said there's clearly going to be part of the strategy you bet to get access to all the relevant records and determine what did the media really know.
The prospect of another legal battle over access to reporters records could be worse for the media than the Miller showdown, said Lucy Doglish, head of the Reporters Committee FOR Freedom OF THE Press.
You now have a situation where you have a government investigation hung completely on testimony from journalists, with journalists turned into witnesses, and that is a scary notion.
I told you.
It's exactly what I said was gonna happen.
This whole thing is gonna be a parade of journalists up there and we're gonna find out what they knew and when they knew it, and we're gonna find out who they told about Valerie Plame.
Oh folks, I can't wait for that and try this.
Love this story.
Headline here, Venezuela to sell cheap oil to U.S. Poor.
Now we remember this story, Hugo Chavez.
This was a story.
It ran again recently last week.
Hugo Chavez announced that he will soon begin selling up to 1.2 million gallons of discounted heating oil in poor communities in Boston and New York via his government's 16,000 Sitgo oil company stations in the U.S. What Democrats could also be counted on to contribute discounted heating oil in Boston?
Kennedys, absolutely, H.R. Abster all making speeches on the floor of Congress about a windfall profits tax, as many of them have done, or calling for government subsidies to the poor for heating oil bills, as Ted Kennedy has done, is just posturing talk when you know you don't have anywhere near the votes to get such legislation passed.
But could Senator Kennedy do something substantive to help the poor with their heating oil bills, as Hugo Chavez is doing?
Well, let's go to number 27 best-selling book on Amazon.com, Do As I Say, Not As I Do, Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy by Peter Schweitzer.
By the way, interviewed him for the next issue of the Limball Letter.
It's a great interview.
If you go to the chapter on Ted Kennedy, read past the Kennedy Family Trust set up by Grandpa Joe in Fiji to avoid taxes on the Chicago merchandise mart.
That's on page 80 to 81.
Then read past the Kennedy opposition to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' approved Cape Cod wind project to harvest free alternative energy and end the Cape's coal pollution and related health problems, a project also opposed by other liberal residents like Walter Cronkite and David McCullough.
There is speculation that they feel their view will be spoiled.
But my guess to the real reason is that the liberals fear the windmills are too closely resembling Christian crosses.
At any rate, if you start on page 89, you will see that the Kennedys own some oil companies themselves.
Arctic Oil, despite the name, drilling in Texas and Oklahoma, Ken Oil, and Mokin Oil.
In 1985, Kennedy converted these two companies to royalty trusts, thus avoiding paying any corporate taxes, windfall or otherwise.
That's on page 92 of Schweitzer's book.
The Kennedys also have oil deposits in Louisiana, as well as mineral rights on properties in Alabama, Florida, and Mississippi.
So it seems that Senator Kennedy is in a position to at least partially match Hugo Chavez's discounts on heating oil to the poor people of Boston and America.
Should we hold our breath waiting for this to happen?
Don't try it, folks.
Well, I'm just telling you, I'm just telling you, don't hold your breath on the Kennedys helping out here.
It didn't work for Mary Joe Kopeckny, and it won't work for you.
But point is, here are these Kennedys, all these oil investments.
They own a couple oil companies.
They don't pay any windfall profits tax.
They've got them sheltered in a bunch of tax trusts and so forth.
And Kennedy's out there bleeding and moaning that we ought to do something to help these people with these high heating oil costs this coming winter and doesn't offer a single thing from his own company.
We'll be back after this.
How many of you even knew that Ted Kennedy's family was involved in the oil business?
Thanks to Peter Schweitzer, we now know.
Back after this, don't go away.
Let's go to Springfield, Missouri.
This is Claire, and welcome to the EIB Network.
Welcome.
Hi, how are you?
Fine, thank you.
Listen, I just wanted to make a comment about some of the things I've been hearing about the demonization of anybody who has questioned the motives for this war.
And I believe, and some of the servicemen I have spoken to personally, believe that this really was an ill-planned venture.
That the people that bombed the World Trade Center were Saudis.
They were not Iraqis.
That's the problem I have with it.
And absolutely, I do not agree that we should pull out immediately because you broke it, you buy it.
We have to help these people put their country back together.
But I don't think a good way to win the hearts and minds of Iraqis is to drop phosphorus on civilians.
Well, I don't think that's what we're doing.
But, you know, let's start at the beginning.
Let's start at the beginning.
You think that the people who dropped the bombs in 9-11 were Saudis.
They were not Iraqis.
Well, 15 of them were Saudis, yes.
Yeah.
Well, no, you're right about that.
But the war on terror started first in Afghanistan.
We also, see, what you're either ignoring or forgotten or don't agree with, one of the three, is the whole doctrine of preemption.
Okay, 9-11 happens.
It changes everything.
We had evidence.
Whitna, there is evidence of al-Qaeda, of bin Laden, and Hussein working together, not a 9-11, but of working together.
It's not a debate.
It's not arguable.
It has been established.
9-11 Commission established it.
So you have 9-11.
It changes everything.
You've got Saddam out there, weapons of mass destruction.
The whole world, every intelligence agency in the world says so.
The UN says so.
Weapons inspectors said so.
We know he had them.
There were 14 UN resolutions demanding he disarm.
He refused.
When given multiple opportunities to disarm, he refused.
He wanted to be the big guy in the Middle East standing up to the United States.
It was thought we can't take a chance, not after what happened on 9-11.
So Iraq was not gone into strictly because we thought Iraqis blew up the World Trade Center.
Nobody ever made that claim.
It was thought that both are part of the war on terror, the whole thing.
It's just like Japan attacked us first in World War II, and we didn't first respond to Japan.
We went into the European theater first.
World War II was fought throughout the world, North Africa, Italy, throughout Europe, parts of Russia, Japan, China.
It was truly a world war.
That's what this is.
And to try to say you can't take Iraq out and say we have no business going there.
Besides that, everybody that's now saying that we went in there for the wrong reasons agreed with going in when we went in.
This is just a political play that's being made.
And the reason why I say that they are now invested in our defeat is because there's no turning back for them now.
They can't take credit when we win because they have now laid it out on the line, the Democrats have, that the whole thing is illegitimate and unjust.
Therefore, we don't deserve to win it.
There's no other conclusion you can come to than we are invested in defeat.
We must lose this.
We deserve to lose because we went there under false pretenses.
Our president lied, all these things.
It's an inescapable conclusion.
Now, it may offend you being lumped in with those people, but that's who they are.
Well, you know, you have to realize, too, you have politicians and then you have real people.
And believe me, I'm disgusted to see people vote for it and then act like they were never for it in the first place.
I'm not happy about that.
I don't agree with that either.
What I'm saying is that somebody should have stood up to begin with and say, you know, we better really, really make sure that we're doing the right thing because innocent people do get hurt.
That's the truth.
Oh jeez.
That is true.
Come on.
3,000 innocent people got killed on 9-11.
3,000 people, we never, once again, I haven't heard from you one condemnation of the bad guys.
To you, we are the bad guys, and it's frustrating as all get out to me to hear all this.
Now, I'm going to, you say that you're not rooting for the U.S. to lose.
And I trust you.
I believe that you are not.
But the position you're taking is no different than if you were.
If you want to pull out, if you want us to leave, if you want us to get because we're killing innocent people and it was flawed, with the circumstances as they currently are, as they at present exist, if we pull out as it is now being suggested, we will lose.
And whether you want that or not, by supporting that policy, you are doing, in effect, the same thing.
You are advocating our defeat.
I know it sounds harsh.
It's not what you intend.
It's not maybe what's in your heart, yours.
But I'm telling you, there are a lot of people on your side.
That's exactly what they want.
And they make no bones about it.
I'm getting emails from them.
We are the evil ones.
We deserve to lose.
We already have lost.
They're coming from these left-wing kook websites.
Make no mistake about the side you're on and who it is that's speaking for you.
Claire, we'll be back.
Thanks for the phone call.
Don't go away, folks.
Hey, by the way, folks, I want to tickle you with something coming soon from the EIB network.
Support for video iPods.
We will be offering support for video iPods coming soon.
See you tomorrow.
▲
Export Selection