All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 6, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:18
December 6, 2005, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
So uh the uh the Saddam just told the uh trial judge in his uh in his case to go to hell.
Said he's not says he's not gets an unjust trial, unjust because he's not gonna go back to court.
He won't go back to the courtroom.
He continues to take his lead from the Democrats in uh in this country.
Greetings, folks.
Great to have you with us.
It's the award-winning thrill-packed, ever exciting increasingly popular growing by leaps and bounds rush limbaugh program here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Networks.
Great to have you with us.
Uh the telephone number is 800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at eIBNet.com.
I have not forgotten one of the items on the agenda today, this story from the Washington Post yesterday.
Actually, it was in Sunday's paper, and it's um entitled uh disappearing act.
Where have all the men gone?
No place good, meaning they're not on college campus.
The and they don't know where the they just in fact they don't answer the question of where have all the men gone.
That's what I'm going to do.
That's what I'm going to tell you.
I'm going to offer my theory as to why fewer and fewer young men are enrolling at institutions of higher learning.
Uh the ratio apparently is two to one, male or female to male in uh and it's not the case in every university, obviously, but in in many of them.
When Snerdley heard about this yesterday, he said, uh, why wasn't it the case when we were in college?
I said, well, the uh and he said this would be a great time to go.
He said, No, it's not a great time to go.
That's my point.
Otherwise, there would be a lot of guys there.
I mean, if you look at folks, I'll just give you a little hint.
We had a story not long ago.
Some guy taking home eck.
He was enrolled in a home eck course, and and uh and a lot of people said, well, he's just he's going where he has to to meet girls.
No, that's not what it's about.
But we'll get into it as the program unfolds.
Uh Texas judge yesterday threw out a campaign finance conspiracy charge against Tom Delay, but ruled that the prosecutor's money laundering charge could go forward.
Mike, grab um audio sound there's no humidity in the air down here today, so the pages are not coming apart easily.
What sound was uh yeah, grab number 14.
Because you know, the the media all portrayed this as actually a big loss of delay.
Oh, Delay didn't win anything here, still faces the money laundering charges.
Oh, this is horrible.
Uh the ruling means that Delay will not be able immediately to regain the House uh majority leader's post he gave up after his September 28th indictment.
Some Republicans said that it means um House Republicans will have to elect new leaders.
Democrats said that delay's not off the hook.
Jennifer Kreider, a spokeswoman for Miss America Nancy Pelosi said this isn't a vindication.
Congressman Delay still faces very serious criminal charges.
This is how it was handled on the situation room with uh Wolf Blitzer yesterday afternoon on CNN.
We're just getting this in to the situation room.
The conspiracy charges against Tom Delay have been thrown out.
But the money laundering charges have not been thrown out.
Let's bring in our senior political analyst Bill Schneider.
Give us the perspective, Bill, what this means.
Big picture for Tom Delay.
Not good.
It means that Tom DeLay will have to stand trial.
The trial is likely, he hopes, to start in January.
Not good.
It means that Tom Delay uh New York Times uh barely got the relevant fact put in the paper.
Uh I think the Washington Post missed it in entirely.
Here's what was left out of the reporting yesterday.
Judge Priest also said he had yet to rule on a defense motion of prosecutorial misconduct.
So that's still to come.
And if Delay wins that ruling on prosecution um prosecutorial misconduct, that can throw the whole case out.
So everybody on the left is uh a little bit hurried here in celebrating uh this so-called loss for Tom Delay.
Others said, hey, the conspiracy charges, eh?
Those are just the fact that those are thrown out, that that's that's no big deal.
You're missing the point here, folks.
If you um if you buy into this, proving money laundering, that standard's pretty high.
What delay wants to avoid the trial altogether?
He wants to be able to go back and stand for uh leadership election in January when the House and the new Congress convenes, but the um well, not the new Congress, but but when the the Republican leadership uh uh takes its vote and and elects its leaders for the upcoming year.
Uh Delay wants to make sure that he's um able to do that and and not at uh not at trial.
But I you know, I I guess it's just the the understandable human and uh news bias that occurs with uh with with legal cases, but here you've had a judge throw out a part of an indictment.
Now, how anybody can say that that is bad news for Tom Delay is beyond me.
Because once a judge starts chipping away at an indictment, you never know where he's gonna stop, and he hasn't finished ruling is the point, and nobody was making that point all day yesterday.
Yesterday at the Saddam trial, by the way, a woman testified from behind a screen, her voice disguised, but her weeping still apparent, that she was assaulted and tortured with beatings and electric shocks by Saddam Hussein's agents in the trial of the former president and seven lieutenants.
Saddam sat stone faced, taking notes on a pad of paper, as the woman known only as witness A told the court how she and dozens of other families from the town of jail were arrested in a crackdown.
Um raised my legs up and tied my hands.
He continued administering electric shocks and beating me.
Several times the woman broke down.
She strongly suggested she had been raped, did not say so outright.
The witness who was 16 at the time of her arrest repeated she had been ordered to undress.
I begged them, but they hit with their pistols.
They made me put my legs up.
There were five or more.
They treated me like a banquet.
Is that what happens to the virtuous woman that Saddam speaks about?
She wept.
When asked by the judge which of the defendants she wanted to accuse, witness A identified Saddam.
When so many people are jailed and tortured, who takes such a decision, she said.
She later quoted a security officer as telling her you're lucky to be at the uh at the Muqabbarat Center and remain a virgin.
She also said that many fellow female detainees lost their virginity to security guards.
I'd like to I just pass this on to you because um these are details of what went on in prisons under Saddam Hussein.
And this provokes no outrage.
The this this gets no coverage.
Now we can't wait to start beating up our own prisoners.
We can't wait to start beating up our own people.
I mean, our own soldiers over over over so-called torturous treatment of uh Al-Qaeda detainees.
So we've had the comments from Dick Durbin and others, and yesterday we had Senator Kerry saying that our soldiers terrorize women, Iraqi women and children in their homes under the cover of darkness and make a mockery of their religious practices and beliefs.
And yet we have all these details from the Saddam Trial.
We don't get one report of it.
We don't there's no outrage, there's no nothing.
And instead, all we are is we are caught up here with the McCain Amendment, which equals American surrender.
Well, the McCain Amendment and the Democrats together equal American surrender.
You got Howard Dean out there now saying, no way we can win.
We need to pull out now.
They've got this new phrase called strategic redeployment or something, which is just highfalutin language for cut and run.
And here's a this is this this story is somewhat related, I think.
More than 17 uh just stick with me on this.
More than 17 million individuals and families could start the new year facing higher taxes because of a provision unfamiliar to most taxpayers called the alternative minimum tax or the AMT, not to be concerned, uh confused with the ATM.
Is the AMT the alternative minimum tax?
The new year means the expiration of a temporary fix that prevents the AMT from hitting millions of people this year on taxes due in April.
The AMT was was um was started when was when was it first made twenty or thirty years ago?
Whenever it was it was first enacted, its purpose was to snare twenty-two people.
Twenty-two people who were millionaires, who had followed the law, who had followed everything in the tax code and didn't pay any taxes.
And a and the IRS and the Democrats, we can't have that.
Twenty-two million twenty-two millionaires, not paying any taxes.
So the alternative minimum tax was enacted, and it every year is ensnaring more and more and more middle class people.
And a lot of people have been raising the alarm about this.
We have got to do something about the AMT.
Guess who's leading the charge now?
The charge now is being led by Democrats.
And it's really crazy because I thought the left wanted to raise taxes, but now all of a sudden they're concerned about the AMT hitting too many people who are not rich, and so they want to do something about it.
Originally designed to make sure wealthy individuals paid some tax, the alternative minimum tax reaches further into the middle class every year as inflation pushes more and more people into its grasp.
Now the House plans this week to debate a bill that would stick a temporary patch on the problem.
The Senate included its fix in a $58 million tax bill last month.
Without any congressional action, the alternative minimum tax will hit 19 million taxpayers next year when it was originally enacted to ensnare 22 taxpayers.
It's going to ensnare 19 million next year, taxes that would have been uh have to be paid in early 2007 when returns come due.
That would include almost three out of four married two-child couples whose incomes fall roughly between 75,000 and 100,000 a year.
It's a large percentage of middle class people for the first time to be ensnared by the alternative minimum tax.
Started in 1969.
1969 to ensnare 22 people.
Now it's already up to ensnaring 19 million people, middle class people, 75,000 to 100 grand, families with two kids.
In a letter circulated among House Democrats, Charles Wrangell of New York came out and sticks sticks up here for these uh people and says we need to do something of the alternative minimum tax.
Um the bottom, they may not get to this is the point.
They may not get to it.
The thrust of the story is we may not really be able to get this done.
And the reason is that members of Congress are too busy debating new rights for terrorists under the McCain bill and a whole bunch of other things.
We're too busy making sure that the United States is not seen as an evil barbarian nation, so we may not get this fixed to the alternative minimum tax.
While we're hearing all kinds of juicy, gory details of genuine torture that came out of Saddam's regime.
We have the McCain Amendment, we have the Democratic Party teaming up, putting the blame for all of this on the U.S. military, U.S. interrogators.
It just it's it's it's a it's a twilight zone.
It's an alternative universe continuing.
It seems like each and every day.
Quick time out here.
We will be back.
We'll continue in just a moment.
Stay with us.
This is December 6th.
That means tomorrow is December 7th.
I wonder how many people know what day that is.
so Hint, it's related to 9-11.
And another hint, it's related to 226.
Now that's a day, but a lot 226?
What the hell's 226?
What is he talking about?
226 is the first World Trade Center attack.
1993.
Uh 9-11, 2001 was the second, and of course, December 7th is Pearl Harbor Day.
And is it an interesting note?
We've got we got Pearl Harbor Day coming up tomorrow.
This is a great post, by the way, at redstate.org.
Let me just read to you what it says.
John McCain is a fool.
He is also a charlatan.
He's convinced the world would be better off if everybody agreed with him, and he set about to make it so.
When McCain was accurately criticized by third-party interest groups, he said about restricting the First Amendment campaign finance reform.
Now, because he was a prisoner of war who was tortured, he's decided to make uh take moral high ground on how the United States treats enemy terrorists, though the U.S. does not torture terrorists.
Nonetheless, McCain has chosen to believe terrorists in captivity and reporters bent on destroying the war effort than believe the military personnel who are keeping us safe.
John McCain is attempting to add to the appropriations process, a provision that would prohibit the United States from doing to captured terrorists, those things we are prohibited from doing to American citizens under the 5th, the 8th, or the 14th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
We will, in effect, under McCain's amendment, be giving constitutional protections to enemy terrorists who, when given the opportunity, slowly slice off the heads of captured Americans.
That is the that is the main point in a nutshell.
That McCain's amendment would be extending constitutional protections to terrorists, enemy terrorists who would chop all of our heads off slowly if they had the chance.
McCain wants to take the high ground.
He also wants favorable media attention.
The media has been trumpeting unproven stories for some time now that accuse the United States of torturing captured terrorists.
Most of the so-called torture is not torture.
In fact, many of the techniques that our military uses are designed to wear down the ideologically hardened terrorists who won't talk and have been trained to endure multiple forms of harassment and abuse.
The military is quite skilled at what it does.
We have preexisting laws that prohibit the use of torture.
Many people like to intentionally confuse torture with rough treatment.
They aren't the same.
John McCain has used the bully pulpit of his life story to advance his pet causes at the expense of the Constitution and now the military.
While the Democrats want to wholly and completely surrender, John McCain insists on fighting, but only if we tie one hand behind our national back.
They go on to say here that the McCain Amendment must be defeated.
Our vital national security interests require as much.
Ironically, should the McCain Amendment be successful.
Pity the poor terrorists, because we will begin resorting to other nations that are not as concerned about coddling terrorists as we are.
Maybe John McCain needs a reminder of the difference between us and them.
And that's probably true if the McCain Amendment passes and we therefore extend constitutional protections to terrorists, Al Qaeda terrorists, enemies of the United States, we will just funnel them off to other places without ever having them directly in our um under our control.
And whatever happens to them there, there's not going to be anything anybody can do to stop.
And it'll probably be worse off for them than now.
But what is what is so disheartening about all of this is that it is simply an effort to gain media attention to stand out from the crowd and to appeal to whoever in this country that this is going to appeal to.
And it also is a bit ego maniacal in that McCain has appointed himself the expert on torture because he was tortured for five years.
He also admitted that torture worked on him.
Now let's not forget one thing, and we talked about this last week.
There is an exemption in the McCain Amendment for the ticking time bomb.
By the way, his should say that his main emphasis for doing this main reason is torture doesn't work.
Torture doesn't work.
Yet his own amendment allows an exemption or at least a discussion of the so-called ticking time bomb example, which, as you know, the ticking time bomb example is if a terrorist is in our captivity and has direct knowledge of a nuclear device that's to go off in hours or days in an American city,
then we are apparently allowed to torture that prisoner to get whatever information he has so we can prevent the device from going off.
Now, McCain still wants the torture in that case to be illegal, but his own amendment suggests that in such a circumstance, the feelings of goodwill, thanks and appreciation on the part of the American people, would see to it that the person who engaged in the torture to get the information would be forgiven and would not be prosecuted.
It would still be illegal.
Yeah, if torture doesn't work, why even put that provision in there?
But I mean, this idea of granting constitutional protections to these people.
All in the name of what?
Making sure the world knows we're good guys?
All in the name of what?
It certainly isn't victory.
This doesn't have anything to do with victory.
And it and nothing coming out of the mouths of any Democrat has anything to do with victory.
What's coming out of the mouths of Democrats Has everything to do with defeat.
We'll have the Howard Dean soundbite coming up in just a moment.
They are invested totally in our defeat.
They're getting happier and more gleeful about it each and every day.
And in fact, they're getting bolder about it.
They're making of themselves sitting ducks, I think they're totally misreading the attitudes of majority of the American people.
In the meantime, you've got Democrats now all worried about this new tax increase because the alternative minimum tax that we may not get to it.
We may not fix it.
We may not be able to have enough time to get to it before the December recess because we're too busy debating how we ought to be fair and nice to terrorists and how we better not torture them anymore like we've been doing ever since the war started.
You figure it out.
Learn it.
Love it.
Live it.
And amidst all this, nevertheless, folks, we're sitting here having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have because I am doing what I was born to do.
I would.
If I had one wish, if actually, have you ever been asked if you had one wish, what would it be?
I figured out that a long time ago.
If I had one wish, it would be that every other wish I ever made in life came true.
Thereby giving me limitless wishes.
But if I had one wish, it would be that everybody could find what it is they're born to do.
That they find what they love to do, and because that's what make people happy and lead them toward uh success.
I look at the number of people that go through life and never find out what it is they want to do.
Or find out at H. It doesn't matter how old you are when you find out, even if you're 45, 50 or 60, but uh I've known since I was eight what I wanted to do, and it it helped me withstand all the obstacles and kept me from getting uh discouraged.
I'm not gonna do it now, but I got some other issue things I want to deal with here first.
I got a phone call yesterday.
Well, we got a phone call from um the Philadelphia Daily News requesting a comment on a column in a black newspaper about Donovan McNabb.
And I I looked at this as I read the column that came along with the request.
It was uh what's it, the Philadelphia Sun.
It's a largely black audience, I'm told.
It's a it's a 20,000 circulation newspaper in Philadelphia.
And this column just skews McNabb.
I mean, it just destroys the guy.
And does so because they are offended that McNabb played the race card when it comes to the reason he decided to have hernia surgery.
Apparently they're upset that McNabb played the race car because he said one of the reasons he had to do the surgery was that fans expect black quarterbacks to scramble.
Now that is a fulfillment of the old stereotype that black quarterbacks are running quarterbacks and not pocket passers.
And so the Philadelphia Daily News calls me and wants my comment on this.
Now, you know what they probably expected.
They probably, because they have this stereotypical view of conservatives, they probably expected me to agree with this black paper.
They probably who knows whatever else.
That's my best guess.
Well, I have a totally different take on all of this, and it is consistent with every other view that I have ever expressed about the media and McNabb in the National Football League and in Philadelphia.
And I just want to get to this in a in a f well before the programs, but probably in the next hour sometime, but I've got some phone calls about this stuff on the torture and the McCain amendment, and also coming up the, you know, where are the boys in college?
Where are the young men?
Why are they not there?
I have that answer too.
They have the answer to everything here, folks.
It's just up to you to listen and accept it.
Now, before we go to the phones of this torture business, a um what the hell's that?
Look at CNN International.
CNN International is just the anti-American channel.
Some babe uh holding looks like an AK-47 of some kind of gun uh under the banner women and al-Qaeda.
We're glorifying these people.
I mean, we're talking about humanizing them.
But this business and torture, let me get back to this.
Yeah, Al Qaeda recruiting women for terror attacks.
That's what that's what that story is.
I I I want to know where is the evidence that we are torturing people?
Really, where is it?
I mean, we're coming up with congressional amendments.
We're gonna come up with a congressional amendment that hopes to dictate national policy on this.
We already have rules and regulations on the books about it.
Where's the evidence that we are torturing?
Where's the evidence that torture is a common practice?
No, seriously, don't tell me Abu Grab and don't tell me Club Gitmo.
Well, that's it.
Well, that's not enough.
Where is the evidence?
What we have are a few still photos.
And we have some, we have a court trial about some of a few people.
We've got nothing but allegations about what went on then at Club Gitmo, when including an incorrect allegation in Newsweek that Korans were flushed down the toilet.
Figure that out.
How many of you can flush a book down your toilet?
Yet Newsweek ran it.
Oftentimes the sources for this information are terrorists themselves.
And who is it that the Democrats choose to believe?
And who is it that McCain chooses to believe?
You know, our government denies it.
Oh, that's no good.
Our government lies because Bush lies.
We must believe Mohammed.
We must believe Ahmed.
We must believe Ali Allah.
Whoever these people are, we're gonna believe them.
And then and then when Dick Durbin takes up the camp, we believe Dick Durbin.
Dick Durbin accuses our troops of all this stuff, and everybody believes it, and we need a new torture bill.
It's absurd.
His constitutional rights business is getting dangerous.
You've got the Supreme Court opening the federal courts to these bastards, these terrorists, for the first time in our history.
As though they are citizens of the U.S., subject to our constitutional project protections when they're nothing more than enemy combatants.
They're the enemy.
We're all concerned with granting them due process rights, and now you have Congress granting them constitutional rights or trying to in the form of the McCain Amendment.
And what is it that precipitates this?
What is it that precipitated this?
I mean, after 9-11, who would have thought this would become a priority of our government for crying out loud.
After 9-11, could you ever think this would become a priority?
And I mean it is a priority.
We're taking this up first before confirming a Supreme Court nominee.
We're taking this up first before dealing with the permanent extension of tax cuts.
We're taking this up first before dealing with the rebuilding of New Orleans, apparently.
We're taking this up first.
Congress has all of its time has taken up with this one way or the other.
We're, I mean, we are...
Our priorities here don't seem to make any sense.
In any shape, manner, or form.
I'm talking about the U.S. Congress and the Democratic Party, and while all this is going on, the Democrats are out there applauding.
Yes, this is what the we need to do.
We got John Kerry going on television Sunday talking about how our soldiers terrorize Iraqi women and children sneaking into their homes under the cover of darkness.
This whole picture of the U.S. as a torturous, torturing, barbaric institution is taking hold among Democrats and apparently some Republicans.
And it's taking up all of our congressional time.
And it's gotten to the point now we're going to talk about granting them constitutional rights.
After 9-11.
9-11 commission didn't think about this, did it?
Was there anything about torture from the 9-11?
What a joke anyway.
This group coming out giving everybody report cards.
Let's give them a report card.
I'll tell you who gets an F right now, Jamie Gorellick.
She shouldn't have been on that commission.
She gets an F for her conduct.
She gets an F for the way she served the country during the Clinton administration.
How do they get off scot-free in the Clinton administration anyway in all this?
I guess they never tortured anybody, guess not, because they weren't even fighting the war on terror.
Then Vanista gets a D. What who are these people?
Great.
They get an F for not pursuing able danger.
Then Vanessa just calls that a distraction.
But we we I mean, folks, I was gonna talk about this yesterday.
This is quite an agenda for McCain's GOP presidential primary.
Listen to what he's gonna run on.
I stood up for the fair treatment of terrorists.
I stood up for curtailing free speech.
I stood up against tax cuts, and I stood up against drilling in the anwar area.
There's McCain's presidential agenda.
There's his primary presidential agenda.
I stood up for the fair treatment of terrorists.
I stood up for curtailing free speech when campaign finance reform.
I stood up against tax cuts.
What a what a campaign agenda he's giving himself.
Here's Bruce in Grand Blanc, Michigan.
Welcome, sir.
Nice to have you on the program.
Mega Ditto's rush.
I am a proud, my numb robot.
I can just see McCain and the guy sitting around talking about this figure, well, we've got to put this in the bill because what if this does happen?
But they never thought it through.
Think about this.
The guy's sitting there, they're torturing him because they think he's got the ticking time bomb.
He does it, they torture him, find out the guy was lying.
He didn't know anything about a ticking time bomb.
So what do they do to the guy who tortured them?
Do they then prosecute the guy?
Oh, but if he'd really been that had the ticking time bomb and it went off, then they would have let the guy go.
It's ridiculous to think that they didn't think this through at all.
Uh let me here's here's the height.
Well, the whole thing is ridiculous.
We mean think it through.
There's uh this there's no thought behind this.
This is pure emotion.
This is grandstanding, this is photo oping, this is this is get McCain knows, he's even said it.
His his base is the media.
And that's who he's playing through.
The media's taking this up.
This is going to continue to get him favorable treatment and comment from the media, because this is what the Democrats uh uh modus operandi is.
U.S. is wrong, U.S. is evil, U.S. is guilty.
Uh McCain knows what he wants and he knows how to go about getting him.
The real absurdity, you ask about the enforcement of the law in the ticking time bomb scenario.
How about this?
You put the ticking time bomb scenario in there.
You acknowledge that it could happen.
You acknowledge, therefore, that torture could work.
You acknowledge that somebody could torture someone and get the information to keep the nuclear device from going off in this country, killing hundreds of thousands or millions, and you still make it against the law.
You still make it against the law.
You then say in your amendment, we are sure, I'm paraphrasing, we are sure that the uh uh uh charity and charitable feelings and the appreciation for the people this country will uh will will see to it.
This person is not prosecuted for breaking the law.
Now, I have to tell you, if we're gonna make it illegal, if there's an amendment that's going to make it illegal to procure information that would keep a nuclear device from detonating in the United States, I would submit to you that our priorities are so out of phase as to be inexplicable.
They're incomprehensible.
But what precipitated this, it's not as though, folks, we were living in peacetime, and we got word that the general prisoners captured over the world for whatever suspicion were being tortured mercilessly and horribly.
And we have to do something about it.
That's not what precipitated this is 9-11.
What precipitated this is 19 hijackers hijacking airliners, flying them into the World Trade Center in the Pentagon.
That's what precipitated this.
That's why we're doing from 9-11.
We get hit by these terrorists, and the first thing we do is go out, or the third thing we do is go out and make sure that we tell these people that they are not going to be tortured, mistreated, or whatever when we capture them.
George Patton, FDR, Ulysses Grant, even Robert Ely are rolling over in their graves.
Douglas MacArthur, can you imagine what they're doing watching this?
We'll be back after this.
And we go back to the phones here on the EIB network, L. Rush Ball on a roll to Los Angeles.
Rick, glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Rush, thank you for taking my call.
I think we lost this debate way back when it first came out with Abu Ghraib.
I mean, you were the only guy who actually came out and said, this is nothing more than hazing.
This isn't torture, it's humiliation.
And we're and Tom McCain and his whole amendment, I mean, it's it's it's it it's the hypocrisy is unbelievable.
He's pro-death penalty.
Why is it okay for for us to put to death as a government, gangbangers in the United States that commit murder, but it's not okay to simply humiliate an international terrorist gangbanger who kills people internationally.
And when you're fighting an enemy, you need to go after their weakness.
If these people aren't susceptible to being beaten, but they are incredibly embarrassed by being uh led around by a woman.
What's wrong with having a woman put a leash around him and walk around him?
You're trying to hit an enemy.
We're fighting a war.
You hit them at the weakness, not their strength.
Yeah, I gr look, I've I've I agree with you from the get-go on this.
I I think we have long confused humiliation with torture.
If you want to read about torture, read what these witnesses in the Saddam trial said was happening to them.
Read about that.
Read that.
And then when you read it, as I shared with you at the outset of the program, understand there's no outrage about this.
No, there's no outrage about it.
In fact, more and more people are thinking that uh, you know, put Saddam back in charge of his own country.
It's the only fair thing to do.
You you you think I was joking about this yesterday?
It isn't going to be long.
I'm going to predict this to you.
It isn't going to be long before some cockamami idiot on the left in this country comes up with that as an idea.
And it will not be laughed at.
It will be seriously considered the impact it might have on future terrorist acts against the United States.
Could this be a show of goodwill?
You just wait.
It's inching in that direction.
And I think Saddam sort of blew it a little bit, and he's blowing it in this trial by losing his cool and threatening not to come back.
He needs to go in there and continue the strategy that Ramsey Clark started on Monday.
That all this is illegitimate.
It's not this nobody's business what he does in his country.
That's not torture.
That's just how you keep a bunch of recalcitrant people in line.
You know, Saddam can teach the world a few things here about how you deal with unruly population.
There's legitimate torture.
And there's no outrage.
No outrage whatsoever.
Now you might say, well, Rush, why should there?
We're not surprised by that.
Why should we be outraged?
This is Saddam Hussein.
Why should we outraged?
We're talking about what the United States does.
No, the fact of the matter is, at this stage of the game, the uh the the prevailing point of view is that maybe all this Iraq thing was a lie and it was unjust, and therefore Saddam was unfairly thrown out of power.
But this this objective here to quote unquote hold us to our highest ideals, and to make sure that we are seen around the world for the beacon of hope and life and democracy that we are.
You know, you have to keep yourselves the beacon of hope.
You have to keep yourselves the beacon of democracy.
You have to hold on to yourself as the citadel of freedom.
If you're going if you if if standing for those things is going to mean anything, if you're not going to stand for them in your own country.
Uh if you're going to weaken your own country in the process of dealing with an enemy like this, what good is showing the rest of the world?
Well, we're doing is showing the rest of the world what a bunch of politically correct wimps that we can be.
That's what we're showing these people.
Did you see the football game last night?
It was a slaughter.
It was a massacre.
Did you see anybody suggest that the Seahawks that's just quit?
Is this not fair?
This is humiliating to Andy Reid.
Andy Reid used to work for Mike Holmgren, the coach of the Seahawks.
Why, somebody called this off.
This is not fair.
The people are going to hate the Seahawks tomorrow for what they did.
This is just not right.
Did you hear any of that?
Of course not.
And it was just a football game for Crying.
Here we are talking about war.
And we got people saying, come on, we stop this Abu Grab.
What are people going to think of it?
For crying out loud, it's just mind-boggling here.
To uh to witness all this, talk about tying hands behind our back and this sort of thing with this never-ending, I swear.
It's going to cause so much damage until somebody is willing to stand up and punt this whole notion.
What the world thinks of us?
Our image around the world is suffering.
Why is it that Al Qaeda doesn't have a rotten image?
Why is it that Saddam doesn't have a rotten image how come it is now that Saddam is viewed sympathetically?
Why is it that these true dictators, murderous thugs, architects of torture?
Why is it that they are now being portrayed as as sympathetic victims almost?
It's because the left in this country despises this country as a superpower and despises the current president that we have, and they don't care what damage they wreak in their process to get rid of him.
Back after this.
Okay, coming next.
Why aren't there uh uh very many men on college camp eye today and the Philadelphia media again turning on Donovan McNabb?
▲
Export Selection