All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 9, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:56
December 9, 2005, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
It's 82 degrees out there, Brian.
I says fabulous.
82 degrees at a humidity's up.
Hubbahub.
I get to get to play golf tomorrow for the first time in a couple weeks.
That's been it's been swamped city here lately.
Greetings.
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen.
The award-winning Rush Limbaugh program with America's Anchor Man is back.
It's Friday.
Let's go.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
Oh, yeah.
Oh, yeah.
Looking forward to it, folks.
Open line Friday, basically.
Whatever we talk about on the phones is what you want to talk about today.
Telephone number 800 282-2882.
Email address rush at EIBNet.com.
It doesn't have to be something that's in the news.
It can be.
It could be something you think that hasn't been discussed enough.
Question, comment, whatever it is.
I know that you are a curious, uh curious lot, so if they've had a burning question about things, well, this is the time to go for it.
You can also go the email route, rush at eIBNet.com.
I remember when I went to uh San Francisco back in 1984.
It was to cover the Democratic National Convention.
I was working for radio station in Kansas City, KMBZ.
Uh, and this is before they were afraid of what I might say.
They sent me to this uh to convention.
Do commentary from the convention, and you get there, uh this is my first one, particularly as a member of the media, and you find out that all of these groups that plan protests, parties, whoever they are, for whatever purpose, there's this giant listing of them.
And where they're going to be doing what.
All this is handed out to the media so the media can show up and hopefully cover this stuff.
And there was this thing that said dykes on bikes.
And I guess it's 1984, it's 21 years ago.
And I said, Well, this is this is this is cool.
Where is this happening?
And it was Dykes on Bikes, and they were going to be uh, of course, they were not protesting anything.
This is the Democrats were in in town, so they were having a big rally.
And now the lesbian motorcycle enthusiasts in San Francisco have won their fight to trademark the name Dykes on Bikes.
It's taken twenty-one years, but uh the lawyer for their group made the announcement yesterday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office had denied applications by the San Francisco women's motorcycle contingent to trademark dikes on bikes, arguing the phrase would be perceived as disparaging to lesbians.
But the National Center for Lesbian Rights and the Brooke Oliver Law Group said the word dike is no longer viewed as derogatory.
Well, we could test that on this program.
I'll bet you the word dike coming out of the wrong person's mouth at the wrong time would be viewed as derogatory.
I'll bet that we can prove this.
Well, we can back up the patent office on it.
Not that I'm gonna try, I'm just making a point.
Uh Shannon Minter, a lawyer for the National Center for Lesbian Rights, said that within the lesbian community, that term has been reclaimed as a very positive term.
It denotes strength and pride and empowerment.
All right.
Remember the now deposed female president of the University of Colorado during the football scandal.
During her testimony before somebody, they were investigating a football coach, the whole football program because they were bringing in these new recruits that were trying to recruit these uh high school kids to come play at Colorado to have sex parties and all this.
And I forget this this this woman's name, the president of the university at the time, but she said that the C word uh in in many circumstances is taken as a compliment.
Remember that?
I've never forgotten that.
I said, well, we put that to the test too and see how that holds up.
Uh I forget the context.
What was even more absurd than that?
This woman was trying to defend somebody.
Uh oh, no, no, that's not a derogatory term anymore, she said.
So now we're being told that the word dike denotes strength and pride and empowerment.
Dykes on bikes.
It's trademark, and uh they're probably franchise this, folks, and there'll probably be offices and clubs and so forth uh in a in a town near you uh down the road.
The San Francisco women's motorcycle contingent, That's all capitalized.
Sought the trademark after a woman in Wisconsin not affiliated with the group attempted to use the phrase for a clothing line.
So they had to get in a big legal argument about it.
U.S. life expectancy has hit an all-time high despite global warming, despite the bird flu.
Despite all of these maladies that are causing pain and suffering around the world.
U.S. life expectancy is now 77.6 years.
Deaths from heart disease, cancer and stroke continue to drop, the government reported yesterday.
Still the march of medical progress has taken a worrisome turn.
See, you can't, you just can't report any good news.
It just can't be allowed to stand.
No, there has to be a critic in everything, the modern journalistic formula.
Life expectancy, 77.6 years, all time high.
Deaths from heart disease, cancer and stroke continue to drop, but don't start feeling good.
The march of medical progress has taken a worrisome turn.
Half of Americans in the 55 to 64 age group, including the oldest of the baby boomers, have high blood pressure.
Two in five are obese.
That means they're in worse shape in some respects than Americans born a decade earlier were when they were at that age.
So no matter what the news, no matter how good it is, we still have to put the news out there that there's some people have high blood pressure, and there's some people that are fat slobs.
Some people are really obese.
So you have to go get a you have to go get a conflicting opinion, no matter what the news, even if it's a fact.
You know how they're doing this in this in this uh the story on the air marshals.
This is this is this is really this is giant C I told you so.
This is from the Christian Science Monitor today.
Air Marshal program is training adequate.
Wednesday's shooting of an unarmed airline passenger in Miami is casting fresh scrutiny on the Federal Air Marshal service.
I told you it wouldn't take long for this to pop up.
You know, before everybody was looking at this with hindsight, had no choice.
Had to do that.
There was no question about it.
Guy's shouting he's got a bomb, he's agitated, he's uncontrolled, he's not responsive.
It's uh can't take the chance, not after 9-11.
And now we've got the benefit of hindsight.
Now the word's coming out.
He was a missionary, and he was helping the poor in the week before this happened.
And now, despite the fact that few security experts question the actions of the air marshals who fired on Rigoberto Alpizar after he behaved erratically and reportedly said he had a bomb in his backpack.
Within the context of their training, they say the marshals acted appropriately, but many now question the training itself.
Hot damn, why are we not surprised?
Yes, many question the training itself as well as the way the federal government has handled the air marshal service since 9-11.
When the small security agency with fewer than three dozen marshals was ramped up to several thousand in just a matter of months.
Why, everybody knows that a bureaucracy is not supposed to grow that fast.
All of this was created under tremendous pressure, fast as they could.
The fact is that there are holes all over it, said Rich Greta, an aviation expert at the University of Portland.
There's a lot of stuff that they really never had the time to think through, so they're always trying to tweak it.
When you do that, it can cause confusion, morale problems.
Some people lose faith in the system.
Look at where we've got one day.
The system's falling apart, lousy training.
They did it too fast.
Nobody knows what they're doing in there.
Morale is for the birds at the Federal Air Marshal Service in just one day.
And it's only going to get worse.
And this story continued.
We've got another university expert, this one from the University of Akron.
The um the federal air marshals uh have been trained to deal with terrorists and how to fire their weapons, obviously effectively given what happened.
But the question needs to be asked.
Has that training been upgraded to deal with this rise again in air rage and the introduction of these new items on December 22nd?
If somebody shows up with a knife and is going to stab a flight attendant or start stabbing themselves, do we shoot them?
These are questions we need.
The answers to, and we're giving the pointy headed academics from the university.
The question is we're now allowing uh knives uh back on planes.
You need to take a knife back at a plane.
The new rule.
can't take a box cutter yet, that'll happen next year, but you can get you get a knife on theirs.
Well, scissors, whatever, something can be okay, no knives.
This was something can be used as as a knife, a knife substitute, if you will.
So this this university guy, this is Andrew Thomas, aviation security expert, University of Akron in Ohio.
Question needs to be asked has that training been upgraded to deal with the rise in air rage and the introduction of these new items like scissors on December 22nd.
If somebody has pair of scissors is threatened to stab a flight attendant or themselves, do we shoot them?
We need to know this.
Well, but but no, we we have to re-exempt.
Look at this is a this is liberals and this is the bureaucracy.
Everything worked as it was supposed to, meaning we have to find out what's wrong with it.
Back in just a second.
Stay with us.
We are back.
We go to the phones now, it's open line Friday.
Leon Hager's Town, Maryland.
I'm glad you waited, Leon.
Welcome to the show.
Thanks very much.
Um Old Fashion Liberal did's from Hagerstown, where the catnip capital of the world, and a Merry Christmas to you, too.
It's just one of the things.
I'm so happy you're playing the political satires again and parodies.
I think it's a wonderful thing.
I'll never forget the Gulf War, the mini-series.
I think it was brilliant.
But I want to get that but I really was calling was about in the beginning when you opened up your show.
You were talking about Clinton and about how the Democrats uh Democrats were always cavers and r uh guys who cut and run.
And I just want to remind you that if this is a national issue, that both parties have done this.
And it goes back to Eisenhower, at least when he ran from le from Lebanon and Reagan ran and Carter ran.
And I think that the the issue is that we have to look and figure out why we did that and we ought to come together as opposed to constantly bashing each other.
Because I don't think our country's gonna be a little bit more than a little bit.
No, that's you know something?
I would be more than happy to do that.
The problem, and I and I that that's absolutely a great, great point.
We are at war.
It'd be fabulous if we were all unified in our objective.
But the thing that I was reacting to today, remember, as I've always said, I don't get up every day and start pouring through the news looking for people to attack.
I look at things I believe in and people I believe in being attacked, and I then go out and defend them.
And this story in the New York Times today was uh another typical cheap shot attempting in one story to say Bush lied about pre-war intelligence, and he got the lies that he wanted because he tortured somebody who ended up lying to Bush.
Bush didn't care that he was lying.
This guy was tortured via rendition in Egypt.
He said what Bush wanted to hear, and my only point is that everything that they claim Bush is lying about was said by Democrats from Bill Clinton on down in 1998.
Absolutely.
Now at this point, it's the Democrats that you need to be talking to about being unified.
My whole point here on this program every day, it may sound strange.
My whole point is to try to persuade as many people as possible, including the left, that they're wrong.
This is a serious, this is not this is not a disagreement about about social security reform or or some you know domestic issue.
This is this is national security.
And we've got we've got the mainstream press lying through their teeth, publishing drivel, publishing garbage, because it echoes what their party, the Democratic Party, is saying.
And I'm telling you, it's it's it's a psyops operation.
It is a propaganda operation, and it's based on lies.
And I'm gonna call it that what I see it.
Yeah.
Can I tell you a quick story 9-11 story to tell you how much I absolutely know for a fact what you say is true?
I was in England two days after 9-11 and saw the Palestinian guy who was Osama bin Laden's spiritual advisor on BBC, giving interviews, telling the world their purpose is to rule the world.
There's no doubt in my mind that they that that that's the issue, and there should be no other issue.
Well, it it's I I know it's it's but but you have some people, and they're Democrats and liberals, whether they're elected or not, who don't want to face that reality, who don't believe that's true.
And even if they were ever to believe it, they think they can prevent that from happening because they're better people.
They can sit down and talk to these people, it can appease them.
Or they can just close their eyes and pretend it doesn't exist and that'll make it go away.
They're a bunch of children.
A bunch of spoiled, rotten little children.
And they can't be counted.
They're immature, they're childish, and it takes the form this childish immaturity now has found a place for daily existence in the New York Times, the DNC Times.
CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, ABC, CBS.
It's a bunch of kids.
There are no adults running out.
Bush is the one adult here.
And it's it's it's uh, you know, it it's it's just amazing to watch this play out.
But I agree with you.
Both parties have had their chances to deal with terrorism and didn't do it.
Uh you can talk about Reagan and Lebanon back then.
We've reached a point though where somebody's finally doing something about it.
All right, maybe we waited too long.
We had we 9-11 was it, I think we had our fill.
Some of us did.
Now we're trying to do something about it, and even that's being politicized, and even that is being used uh by by the Democrats here, and they're it's just it's to me it's unforgivable.
These these people need to really, really pay a price for what they're doing.
Let me illustrate this.
I'm gonna go to the audio sound bites.
Last night's hard boiled with Chris Matthews, always amazing, was um maybe even more so.
Last night, Chaka Fatah, uh Congressman from Philadelphia, uh frequent guest on Hardball, and Matthews was just beside himself because the Democrats are losing ground.
Bush is still in office, he hasn't pulled the troops out, nobody's listening to Mertha, Alito's been nominated, the economy's roaring, Bush's approval numbers are coming back, and Matthews is starting to beat up on Democrats.
So he says, when you look back at a Vietnam War, Chaka, they used to have votes all the time in the U.S. Senate and U.S. House.
They'd have the Cooper Church amendment.
There'd be another amendment being offered at different times, always had an amendment to try to return the troops.
How come we're not seeing these test votes?
Where are you guys?
I don't understand it.
If there's a dispute over whether it come relatively soon, like Mertha said, and the president says stay until the job gets done, how come we don't see this coming to a vote ever?
Well, because the voices in the Republican Party, like uh Senator Chuck Hagel, who I think's been very responsible on this matter, and Walter Jones in the House and others, they really they they the party has decided that for party discipline purposes, they need to stay together and stay behind their president.
And I think at some point we will get to, and probably sometime next year.
I think Jack Berth is right.
At some point, they will change course because the Pentagon says there is no military victory to be won.
So the Democrats can't call for a test vote because the last time they did, only three of them voted for it.
What do you mean, Chris?
Test vote?
They just had one.
Three Democrats voted for it.
There's no that was practically suicide then.
You want to go do it again?
And there's Chuck Afatas.
Well, we can't really do anything until we get a Republican defector.
Chuck Hagel.
We can count on Chuck to defect.
Chuck probably next year, Chuck will join us, but until Chuck does the, we can't, we can't, we can't do anything.
Because we need Chuck Hagel.
We're talking about these people winning the House and the Senate back.
Move on to cut seven here.
So Matthew says, well, most of the public is still looking for the Democrats to get organized to have a clear alternative to the president.
Nobody's seen that yet, Congressman.
Why don't you guys get off your duffs and do something?
You keep talking about, you keep talking about you don't do anything.
Where are the test votes?
Why aren't you going to get us out of a rock?
That's what we want to all get out.
Why aren't you going to do it?
The party in charge has to be held accountable for their actions.
We want to hold the minority party responsible for the city.
As long as Joe Lieberman is making more noise than Mertha.
And until we give Chuck Hagel and his views a decent airing, you would see that there's even people on their side.
We've got serious dementia and delusion in one package with both these guys on this show.
In the first place, who among us believes that Lieberman is getting more attention than Mertha?
On what pl Chris?
I know you're out there.
If you're not listening at the moment, you'll hear about this.
You know, I love you.
You know I think you're a great guy.
You know, I think you've got a pretty good brain.
But what are you watching or eating or smoking?
Mertha is smoking McCain on media attention by a factor of a hundred to one.
And Chaka Fatah.
You can't do anything until Hegel shows up?
You can't do anything until Maverick Chuck Hagel defects from the Republicans?
It's not up to you guys to have your own plan.
All you have to do is criticize.
Folks, it's even better than I thought.
This is fabulous stuff.
You need to be smiling about this as I am.
And we're back.
Having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
All right, I want to I want to put some put some thoughts together here during the break.
I want to go back to the guy from Hagerstown, Maryland, who talked about Eisenhower running from Lebanon and Reagan running from uh from Lebanon and so forth.
Let's take a look at who these people are.
Eisnauer ran from Lebanon, right?
Uh-huh.
He also led us to uh victory in World War II over Hitler, Tojo, and Mussolini, right?
Uh Reagan ran from Lebanon, right?
Yeah.
Uh he won the Cold War and destroyed the Soviet Empire and its puppet states in eastern Europe.
How in the world you compare this to Bill Clinton?
How in the world you compare these two guys to any Democrat president since Truman?
How many of there been?
JFK?
Who's the other one?
Car Oh, yeah.
Well, no, yeah, LBJ, Jimmy Carter.
How do you where do you get off comparing these people?
Show me, show me a Democrat in recent history has done one tenth what Ike did or what Reagan did.
Yeah, Reagan pulled a Marines from that base in Lebanon.
What should he have done?
We didn't know who these people were or where they were, as we did by the time they hit us in 1993 at the World Trade Center.
I'm not I'm not making any excuses here.
I just I d what what what what should Reagan have done?
Unleashed our armed forces on who and what and where?
As for Chris Matthews, I got a couple more bites here.
It gets even better.
His next question his next next guest is Thomas DeFranc of the of the New York Daily News.
And here, listen to this question.
Get this question.
I I kid you not.
Chris Matthews quote to his guest, I wonder where this word victory keeps being used over and over again, as if it means something.
Where is this word victory coming from?
I think that's coming from uh somebody on the NSC who studied this, a uh former professor from Duke the Washington Post has done a terrific story.
Just say the word victory over and over and over again if people think of victory.
Well, because people need to feel like there's a chance that victory is around the corner in Iraq.
It's better for the president.
I mean, a month ago or during his August vacation, he made a speech on the war in Idaho.
He mentioned the word victory three times.
At Annapolis, he mentioned the word victory fifteen times.
Is this not fabulous?
No, it's a conspiracy.
It's a conspiracy, it's a marketing plan.
Where does this word victory come from?
What the what the hell is that all about?
It's what we're attempting to achieve and what the Democrats are hoping to undermine.
Now, Chris, I I know I can tell by by just the sound bites from today's show that you're long and you're sitting out there dreaming of the glory days of Vietnam when our brave armed forces were being undermined here at home by radical nutcases.
They were burning buildings on college campaign, burning the American flag in the streets, visiting the communists in North Vietnam and the Soviets and the Red Chinese were on the march around the world.
But those good old days are gone, Chris.
You can go back and you can try to recreate the glory days, but you can't get there from here.
You can't turn Iraq into Vietnam.
You can't turn victory into defeat.
You've given it your best shot out there, you and your guest pals, but it's backfiring on you as it always was going to backfire, because the American people know what's at stake here.
They do want us to win.
They're not hoping that we lose.
They do support the troops.
And and and try as as as you might.
They're not going to get behind the loser bandwagon.
What in the world makes people think people want to do that anyway?
Okay, losers over here.
Winners over here.
Who thinks the loser side's gonna be bigger when you get to choose?
Yeah, okay, I want to lose.
I'll join the losers.
Well, what would that pack of people look like?
Okay, we're gonna choose upsides here in America.
The American media is gonna choose upsides here.
We're gonna have the winners and the losers, and you go to the side you want to go to.
They actually think people are gonna join the loser side.
What do you mean I'd be too hard on Democrats?
Where uh Snerdley says I'm being too hard on Democrats because they don't really know victory.
It's been so long since they've had one.
I know what you're saying.
It's sort of like, why should they care about democracy in Iraq?
It hadn't been treating them well in recent years.
So what good is democracy?
I can understand that too.
I know they haven't had a lot of victory, but absence makes a heart grow fonder.
A lot of people want to win.
That's true, but liberals are interested in life's losers.
Life's losers are the victims of world, of the world of life, and as such need liberals to help guide them through the morass that the the victors cause, mainly the rich, uh Exxon Mobile and Walmart.
Uh and those those suspects change uh every month or so, depending on who the liberals want to target.
Uh no, I mean the idea that the American people are going to actively choose the losing side and get on but well, and I know what some of your liberals say they did it in Vietnam, they did it in Vietnam.
No.
No, they weren't choosing to lose.
That's not what was at stake.
You guys are trying to drum up support for defeat here.
And the American people don't want they know what's at stake here.
9-11 happened.
But we're not through with the audio sound bites, ladies and gentlemen.
Because last night, yesterday afternoon on the Fox News channel, with my old buddy Neil Cavuto, he interviewed uh Representative Sheila uh Jackson Lee from Houston.
Uh now, Sheila Jackson Lee uh replaced the late Mickey Leland, uh, who was unfortunately killed in a plane crash in a somewhere in the mountains of Ethiopia on a goodwill mission.
So she's the new, and she'd been there for a while now, but she her claim to fame is that she went to NASA or the jet propulsion lab somewhere, and a Mars rover, you know, was was uh doing its number out there on the surface of Mars.
It was it was trucking around and making new discoveries, and she looked at it and she said, Is it going to go over to where the astronauts planted the flag?
Of course, everybody in the room could go we say to this.
The microphones and cameras were on.
That's how we all know it.
Uh sort of like when Gore went into Mount Vernon, looked at a statue of Ben Franklin and said, Who's that?
Uh or it might have been Thomas Jefferson, he didn't know.
This is the same thing.
Of course, the astronauts haven't been to Mars yet, unless there's a conspiracy we don't know about.
They were in the moon and planted the flag on the moon.
So here's Sheila Jackson Lee with Neil Cavuto.
The question is, there's you, there's Nancy Pelosi and Mertha, and then there's John Kerry and Hillary Clinton and some of the others who have a very different view.
Is this is this this is about this is about Iraq?
Is this a battle for you guys?
No, and as you well know, and I my plan includes uh diplomacy uh Arab uh coalition, uh a Iraqi memorial so that we can stop talking about whether these are heroes, uh focus on the 15,000 injured.
But but no, I don't think the divide in our party is going to be a divisive one.
The voices are being raised for reasonable response to the failures going on now.
Some of us want redeployment uh in the next uh couple of weeks.
Voices are being raised for reasonable response to the failures going on.
They can't help themselves.
But now she's talking about an Arab coalition and an Iraqi memorial so we can stop talking about whether these are heroes and focus on the 15,000 injured.
She wants, she wants she wants a uh an Iraqi memorial like the Vietnam veterans memorial.
And this is only because they're in damage control mode now.
They know they've got Dean out there surrendering the flag, they're swaying the right flag, they've got they got Carrie out there calling troops terrorists uh for all practical purposes.
Um let's go back to Fox.
That's this morning with their morning show, Brian Kilmead's talking to Martin Frost, uh former Texas congressman who hates delay, by the way.
And the question is, Martin, um, from what you know, and I I know you've been following this, is is Howard Dean being taken out of context?
Well, I think what uh Chairman Dean was trying to say was that the administration has made a lot of mistakes.
Look, this thing should not be politicized.
That's what the Republicans want.
They want to make this into a big political issue.
All the Republicans want to do is say, oh, gotcha.
You know, you someone's made a political statement that they ought to be being constructive.
Let's work together on a bipartisan basis.
Let's figure out how we turn this over to the Iraqis.
I think what Chairman Dean was trying to say was the administration has made a lot of mistakes.
Well, why didn't he say that?
Now, as to this business of gotcha.
Let me let me uh define this for you, because some of you think, what is this gotcha?
The Democrats are the ones playing gotcha.
They they don't really think so.
The other day, whenever it was, it was it must have been must have been Tuesday when uh when when Carrie's spokesman sent that statement over to Wolf Blitzer, and he said, Ken Melman is nothing more than a Republican hack and Rush Limbaugh's a donut-eating draft dodger.
And and neither would know about security of the troops.
I'm a decorated uh veteran and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
So, you know, I have a lot of liberal friends out there, and I like to tweak them.
So uh, and this is five o'clock in the afternoon when I got the transcript, so I sent it over to them.
And a couple of them wrote back and said, I really I hope you don't get caught up in this game of gotcha.
Don't start that.
Gotcha.
I wrote, what do you mean?
Gotcha.
Who called who something?
All I did was play what Kerry said.
I simply repeated the soundbite.
All I did was say what he said.
He said American troops have no business going into the homes of Iraqis at night and terrorizing women and children.
And so the Democrat point of view is they should be allowed to say whatever they want.
Carrie, especially this elitist snobbery of his.
He doesn't think anybody has the right to question him.
Nobody has the right sometimes to even look at him, such as his countenance.
How dare anybody question one of John Kerry?
Oh, there nobody can question me.
That's his attitude.
Rambles on as though he's demented.
Don't know what he's gonna say sentence to sentence, neither does he.
But when it's over with, he thinks it's been brilliant, and he doesn't think anybody has the right to criticize it.
And before I even criticized it, I simply repeated it.
I played the tape.
And then liberals think doing that is gotcha.
Liberals think accurately quoting them is attack politics.
Accurately quoting them is mean spirited.
So when I uh th these these people responded to me and said, Ah, this is gotcha.
This is this is horrible, this is not going to advance.
It's not gotcha.
This is pointing out huge flaws in your argument and on your side of the aisle among your supposed leaders.
But see, we're not supposed to do that, folks.
We're not supposed to question the left.
We don't have the we don't have what it takes to question them.
No, they're smarter than the rest of us, and we are just too dense to be able to understand them.
So when Martin Frost says, look, it's just a Republicans politicizing things.
That he's even saying that about Dean.
Hey, you know, this is just gotcha.
This isn't just politicizing statements.
They have no clue that the chairman of the party running around advocating defeat, defeat, saying we can't win, is not something that people are going to have a truly visceral reaction to.
So this is arrogance and condescension on their part.
And I'm telling you, those two characteristics set them up for failure each and every time in the area of substance, because they're not prepared to deal with that.
Quick timeout, all they want to do is run away.
All they want to do is no, no, no, you can't say that.
You're you're conservative.
I you can't, you don't have the right to question me.
You're just playing gotcha.
They don't want to engage in the arena of ideas, folks, because they can't win there.
We'll be back.
Stay with us.
So the phones, Justin and Brookfield, Ohio.
I'm glad you called, sir.
Next up you are.
Welcome to the show.
Hey, I'm really excited about this new GOP ad, Rush.
I do The uh the white flag of surrender, uh, Howard Dean.
It is a great ad.
It's it's awesome.
I mean, I I spend a lot of time on the internet because I don't trust the mainstream media, so most of the reliable news I get from talk radio and the internet, and when I'm online, I checked this morning, it would I watched it, and I just have to say I'm excited.
I sense that the right is starting to fight back.
I mean, between this, the OEDO nomination, that vote that we called for, you know, the uh only three Democrats would actually stick to their talking points.
Yep.
I'm excited.
I just can't.
You ought to be.
Ever since the conservative crackdown began, as I talked about a moment ago, all of these things have started happening for the good.
And ever it it's it's fascinating because at the time everybody was worried that there was a conservative crack up that we're all falling apart during the Harriet Myers nomination, and I told you it's just the exact opposite.
I want to thank thanks for the call, Justin.
In case you uh don't know what he's talking about.
Mike, grab audio soundbite number four.
We don't have the video, obviously.
Uh you can see the video if you go to the Drudge Report.
His link to this will take you to GOP, and you can you can watch the video of the ad.
We can play the audio for you and set it up.
It's about 30 seconds.
The first five seconds of the ad is just music, and there's a white screen with text on the screen.
There's no announcer.
You read the text on the white screen.
It says Democrats have a plan for Iraq, retreat and defeat.
Then a white flag waves, and Howard Dean appears.
All that takes place in the first five seconds.
All you'll hear of that is the music, but here's the rest of the ad.
The idea that we're going to win this war is an idea that unfortunately is just plain wrong.
So the there's no specific time frame, but I would say the withdrawal ought to start now, right after the elections, December 15th.
There is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, uh you know, women.
That's uh that's the ad, and all through it, the white flag is flashing across the screen when Carrie is speaking, when Barbara Boxer's speaking with Dean is speaking.
The white flag of surrender.
Uh and it is it's it's powerful ad.
So Pete I'm glad you feel goosed up by this.
You should you should, because this is the kind of thing that um will attract others.
It's all and it's all predicated on the president.
I I have to tell you, since the president got engaged on this, nominated Alito, started making speeches on Iraq and the economy.
That makes everybody else confident to get behind him.
It's just the way it is.
You know, most people are not leaders.
He's the elected leader of the country, not just of his of his party.
This provides this leadership, and it's it's it's to me not a surprise to see how quickly people want to get on board and uh and join the party.
Here's Pat in Lincoln, Nebraska.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, Russ.
Merry Christmas.
Same to you.
Normally I agree with your assessment of the uh Democrats, but this time I think they're misunderestimating them.
I think they know we're close to victory and our drawdown, and they want to claim the troops are coming home because of their outcry.
And the bite that you just played about victory shows my point.
Uh the fight that I just played about victory.
What you mean, you mean you you mean uh the bite about what is victory.
Chris Matthews, so where's this victory coming from?
Yes.
How does that prove?
That's gonna bring these guys home.
That's their mantra.
That's let them say that.
That's not going to be the case.
Let if they want to say that, let them stay invested in defeat.
If they want the American people to think, if you're right, if all this isn't we've we've talked about the possibility that the only reason they're calling for these troop withdrawals, 20,000.
There is an interesting reason why Mertha is saying 20,000 need to come home.
He's not saying 30, he's not saying 10, he's saying 20, because that's the original Bush plan.
So they would they do want to make it look like they made it happen.
Okay, let uh uh I'll grant that that that may be part of their policy.
But if they then want to say that the troops coming home represents defeat, I say let them.
Let them take all the credit for that they want.
If they want to be the party of losers, and if they want to try to collect as many people who want to lose in this country so that they can return themselves to power, I say let them make that play.
Quick time out, back after this.
Okay, the Ninth Circus has said that jurors are free to use biblical texts in reaching their decision on the death penalty.
And also this uh effort to have the uh uh oath recited in Islam or uh has been defeated uh in a state.
▲
Export Selection