All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 23, 2005 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:28
December 23, 2005, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Greetings to you, thrill seekers, music lovers, and conversationalists.
All across the fruited plain, America's anchor man is here.
America's news commentator is here.
America's play-by-playman of the news is here.
I'm Rush Limboy, your host for life on Friday.
Let's go.
Live from the Southern Command in Sunny South Florida.
It's open line Friday.
All right, you know the rules.
Open line Friday.
You pick it.
You talk about it.
Whatever you call and you get on the air, that's what we talk about, whether I'm interested in it or not.
Whether it makes any sense to me or not.
Whether it's dull and boring is irrelevant.
If you Sorry, you don't want to go that far.
Oh.
Snurdly, I thought he was trying to no, don't go that far with the dull and boring.
I'm just trying to say that on Friday, you can determine what we talk about when we go to the phones, because uh normally on Monday through Thursday, I determine that because I'm in charge.
On Friday, I take one of the most courageous career risks known to exist in all of major media.
Letting you determine such things, and I look forward to it.
800 282-2882 is the number.
If you want to be on the program, Snerdley has a question.
What is the question?
Mm-hmm.
Uh.
All right.
Snurdley asks me, do I ever rethink issues on which I have long held a specific view?
Traditionally held long-term opinion.
Do I ever question, go back and re-question things?
Uh yeah.
But I I do.
I'll tell you one of the most recent time for me was.
I remember back prior to the uh Clinton tax cuts or tax increases.
I made this this this wild prediction that it would ruin the economy.
And the economy didn't do as badly as I thought it would do.
And I said, wait a minute now, this is not, this doesn't work.
This is not supposed to happen.
You can't take money to the tune that he did out of people's pockets and have the economy grow like crazy.
And I thought, okay, well, why is this happening?
Now I was not, I was not, I was not revising my opinion of tax cuts uh nor tax increases, but I was wait a minute, is there something that I'm missing about the way the economy works that all these big tax increases can cause this robust activity?
So I I looked into it and I got hold of some people who are more uh knowledgeable because it's their career on economics than uh than I am.
And uh what I was told was that by the time Clinton did this, the effect of the Reagan tax cuts, which had started in the early 80s and had throughout that decade income tax rate reductions.
We went from a top marginal rate of 70% to 28% during Reagan's presidency.
That was profound.
Clinton did not take it back up to the same late uh uh rates and levels.
Had Clinton gone back to exactly what what what uh Reagan had cut, then my theory would have proved out.
But uh but Clinton's increases took place on the rich.
And the the uh the reason the economy grew was because the rich and the entrepreneurs in this country simply said, screw that, I'll work harder.
I'm not gonna deal with less just because this guy's raising my taxes.
There's a lot of belly aching about it.
But the tax increases that Clinton implemented were not enough to offset the inertia and the and the power of the Reagan tax cuts.
And in fact, a lot of the economic strength of the 90s had to do with Republican budget cutting.
The contract with America, Republicans taking over the house had more to do uh because we got rid of some onerous regulations at the same time.
So, yeah, but I went back and looked at that.
Um I I have not gone back and and uh and re-examined a death penalty.
I do uh every time we do execute somebody, uh it is a uh even when we when we executed uh Tukey, uh when he uh you know went from uh the Crip uh to the Crypt Walk.
Um uh, you know, founded the Crips, ended up taking a crippled walk.
Uh okay, when you get up in the morning, you're the citizen was executed by the government.
It's sobering.
It's really, really sobering.
And I said, stop and think about that for a minute.
And uh did it accomplish anything.
And uh I go back to the roots of my belief on this, and the roots of my belief are in the Bible and in our constitution.
Um the Constitution, no one shall be denied the right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness without due process.
So clearly there was an intention of the founding fathers that the death penalty be uh uh an appropriate punishment.
And I always I always find comfort in this.
There are always people who um say, well, but it's it's it's it's it's it's not gonna rehab anybody.
Uh it's not it's not rehabilitative, uh, you're not gonna and it's not a deterrent.
Uh you're not gonna deter anybody.
Yes, you are, you're gonna deter that person from doing it again.
I don't I've never bought the deterrent argument, obviously, is this a proper punishment?
Is it a proper punishment?
And I've always, yeah, I uh I I've never wavered on this.
I uh I believe that it is.
But I the uh actually, Mr. Sturdley, the longer I live, and the uh the older I get, be 55 next month, the the more mature, can't help but mature, even if you're still a kid at heart, the more mature I get, the more rooted in my core beliefs I become, and and and the more confident of them I become.
The more I learn uh the less those views are challenged by me internally or questioned.
Uh because I'm I'm continuing to add, even though some of you might not think this possible, I'm continuing to even get smarter.
I'm adding intelligence.
I I come up with even additional reasons to back up.
And it it's sort of like a life progression.
Like I knew when I was an early teenager what my core beliefs were.
Uh they were conservative, but I wasn't able to tell anybody why back then.
I I wasn't able to really argue with anybody or explain it.
Is this the way that I thought about things?
And as I grew older uh and and and beg you know began listening more closely to my dad as a resource rather than just a parent who was trying to crimp my style, like all kids think their parents do.
Um started getting reasons why this works, why it's right, why what I believe is right.
And then I became acquainted with Mr. Buckley, and it got cemented even more.
And then I started reading more and more of the conservative brains from that era back in the 60s and the 70s, who are the real heroes of the conservative movement to me, because they were the people laboring in obscurity and anonymity in the basements, turning all this stuff out.
You talk about being a minority, and you talk about being impugned and laughed at and discarded and considered second-class thinkers and citizens.
It was those guys back in the 60s.
And yet you go back and read uh some of the things of of uh Russell Kirk and Bill Buckley in the early days, or Whitaker Chambers go back and uh uh uh read some of the the books by Hayek, Friedrich von Hayek.
I mean, it it yeah, some of that stuff was heavy reading for me when I was that young, but uh I go back and recheck them now and then I just get more and more excited that I'm right every time I go back and consult uh some of the the early sources I used to give me the uh reasons why I thought some of it was instinct, I'm sure a lot of it was upbringing, but it's still it's who I was and and and who I am, and it just gets stronger as as I go on.
So no, I don't I don't I don't challenge my I don't that I'm not I don't find that I'm often challenged to think.
This is by the way, a typical liberal trick.
When I first started going on uh on television, they would ask me, is there anything you've said that you regretted?
Now that's when I was a neophyte, and I was, of course, I answer questions.
So I'd start thinking, is there anything I've said that I regret?
And I thought I could I thought I could make inroads with them by, yeah, okay, I wish I hadn't said that or this or that.
See, see, see, he does it, and and they used it to launch an even bigger attack.
Um I have since learned not to accept the premise.
I've since learned that liberals never get asked that question.
You ever said anything you disagree with?
You ever said anything that you regret saying?
Did you ever do anything that you regret doing?
They are never asked those questions.
So I've learned now, don't accept their phony plastic banana premises.
Because their premises are all based on the assumption that we are all wrong.
And that they are all right.
And uh you idiot, have you ever really stopped to hear yourself?
They asked that's essentially the question.
Have you ever apologized or regretted anything that uh that you've said?
I mean, if anybody ought to be asked that question, it'd be every elected Democrat in Washington who has echoed this left-wing base rant that Bush equals Hitler, that Bush created terrorism.
Some of the things that they've accused and charged the president with are they're treasonous themselves.
And they're outrageous.
And nobody ever asked, do you do you regret saying that about them?
They never get asked that question.
So, you know, I I've just all I've done is become more firm in what I believe as I've uh as I've grown older.
I don't I don't uh uh question things, uh, re-examine.
It's not because I'm having doubts, it's because I uh uh simply learn more.
Uh and uh in addition to that, more occurs to me myself without even some of these things, just watching life go by.
I mean, one of the greatest educations in this country is just listening to liberals.
Just watching them and then and then applying what they do and say to uh something called common sense and reason, and you find you can't.
You can't.
It's uh very little of it is even rational.
I mean, everything the liberals have tried to do has been an utter failure.
Well, not everything, but the vast majority.
War on poverty, the great society, all of the their New Orleans, I mean, the way they have chosen, their utopias uh are anything but their utopias are outposts of misery and neglect and poverty.
I mean, there's there's nothing about liberalism that has begun to recommend itself to me as I've grown older.
Is that your question?
That's okay.
Well, liberalism, any I well, yeah, I re-examine a lot of things, but but I not not from the standpoint of oops, was I wrong about this?
I can't tell you the last other than 92, those 93 Clinton tax increases the most recent example that I can give you.
By the way, uh speaking of liberals and democrats.
So I predict that Saddam will take up their catcalls against Bush as his defense.
Bush lied, there were no weapons of mass destruction, Bush lied.
I should get my country back right about that.
I also predicted it won't be long after the Iraqi elections that we'll start hearing about election fraud and other such things.
Lo and behold, the AP has run a story.
Iraqis marched to denounce election results, protesters gathered outside the country Friday to denounce parliamentary elections that demonstrators called rigged in favor of the main religious Shiite coalition.
In Baghdad, unknown assailants kidnapped a Sudanese diplomat.
What Democrat consultant is over there advising these people?
That's the question.
We will be back.
Stay with us.
Okay, let's get to this Patriot Act stuff uh with Senson Brenner, and then we will get to your phone calls.
This is the key to what the House did here.
Sensenbrenner has a press conference yesterday.
Reporter said to him, You you said that you acted to avert having President Bush call a special election of Congress.
Did the White House tell you that the President was prepared to do that?
And can you talk about your discussions with the White House over this issue this morning?
I did not want to leave the American public more vulnerable to a terrorist attack because the filibuster went on in the Senate.
And I conceded the President's point on that.
The fact is that a six-month extension, uh, in my opinion, would have simply allowed the Senate to duck the issue until the last week in June.
Now they came pretty close to wrecking everybody's Christmas.
Uh, I didn't want to put the entire Congress in a position of them wrecking everybody's independence day.
And what he means by that is that the six-month extension that the Senate agreed to on the Patriot Act would expire right before the July 4th recess, and the same thing would have happened then.
Here's the question that needs to be asked about this.
All week long we kept hearing from people that the Patriot Act is unnecessary, it overreaches, it oversteps.
And the people that voted for it originally led the charge, saying that it's too big, it's too cumbersome, it's too invasive.
And yet they're willing to extend it.
Hello Earth.
They're willing to extend.
They want to extend for six months.
Something they hate.
And yet there's a new version that they wouldn't vote on that contained 30 additional safeguards against the violation of civil liberties.
And they won't allow that.
They thought that was not good enough.
They're worried about what's currently in the Patriot Act, and yet they wanted to extend it for six months.
They wanted to punt the issue.
This is nothing more than the Democrats' attempt to set this up as a major campaign issue.
So Sensenbrenner came along next year.
Sensenbrenner came along and said, I am fed up with the way the Senate is toying around and messing around with the national security of this country.
We have come to an agreement.
The conferees in the House of the Senate came to an agreement on an extension of reauthorization of the Patriot Act, and they're killing it.
And the House has had this happen to them for years in the Senate.
And finally Sensenbrenner spoke up.
Later on, he added this.
It will force them to deal with the issue of the Patriot Act Conference report.
Now the Senate is going to have to make a decision.
They can either accept the conference report, which has over 30 additional civil liberty safeguards that are not in the current Patriot Act, or they can vote for extensions of the current Patriot Act that do not contain the civil liberties safeguards.
This is pure politics, playing politics for the nation of security.
People that are opposed to it allow it to be extended.
If it's bad now, why extend it?
Then this morning on the Today Show, Katie Curry talking with Howard Feynman.
Says, let's start with the Patriot Act.
We just heard uh from Chip Reed, Congress compromised, extended the Patriot Act for an additional five weeks.
Senate was willing to go for six-month extension.
The White House wanted the provisions extended permanently.
So how did all this come to pass, Howard?
It came to pass because the Republicans are no longer unified.
And that's the whole story of Congress this year.
The Republicans who have been unified and who have provided the base for George Bush and his many victories in the last four years just kind of fell apart this year.
Whether it's John McCain arguing with him about torture policy or these libertarian Republicans arguing about the Patriot Act or moderate Republicans arguing about the budget.
The president doesn't have unity within his own party.
And this echoes something that I said not too long ago, and many times, in fact.
We know who the left is.
The left is going to do what they do, and they're predictable.
The president's big problem uh has been his own party.
Here is uh here's Rick in Boston.
Rick, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to the program.
Nice to talk to you again, sir.
Merry Christmas.
Thank you, sir.
I wanted to follow up.
I appreciated hearing from the gentleman from Connecticut earlier who talked about party discipline.
And you seem to equate party discipline a little bit, and I and maybe I'm wrong, to mind control.
But I want to I'm like Democrats have.
And I wanted to set the record straight on that little bit.
I'll take it.
Well, no, what let me re-restate it, and then you can my my point, what I what I should have said was party discipline is going to require people saying and doing things they don't believe in order to keep them in line.
And I don't think that's on our side's gonna hold up, and I don't think that's a winning thing.
I I don't think you get a bunch of people saying things and voting things and doing things they don't really believe just for the sake of party unity.
That's gonna lead that huh?
There was always a mechanism traditionally in place in the Congress for dealing with that.
And if I could give you an example.
For instance, we have we have somebody, as you know, named Olympia Snow.
As rhino as they come.
Right.
There's no guarantee in the United States Constitution that she just because she's a Republican, that she gets a seat on the Senate Finance Committee.
That is a hugely sought-after, prestigious position.
To say nothing of a fundraising base.
Now, in the old days, party party loyalty would be forgiven or dispensed with.
For instance, let's say Olympia Snow said to Bill Frist, listen, I know the leadership wants me to vote to open Anwar, but I can't.
Now that would have been permissible, even under party discipline.
Because even under a system of party discipline, you are never asked to vote against your constituents.
But people forgot to tell Olympia Snow that Anwar was in the state of Alaska, where the residents actually want it.
and then when you come down to the whole issue of leverage, what is the single biggest employer in the state of Maine?
Bath Ironworks.
There are subtle ways of saying to somebody like an Olympia snow, like a Susan Collins.
Nice Navy contracts you got there.
Sure hate to have anything happen to them.
And this has been going on in politics for time immemorial.
Leverage and horse trading, leverage in horse trading.
And it's not immoral.
There's nothing wrong with it.
At the end of the day, sometimes we need the result.
And if certain members want it to be all stuffy and and full of their own virtue I'm I'm I'm all for this.
I just uh the way things are currently constituted.
Well, let me give you an example of how it hasn't worked in the past when we come back.
The name um uh John Fuhan ring a bell.
All right, folks.
I th th now this I just saw someone on TV here.
Uh th there's uh obviously around this time of year, the uh the networks assume that we can't take care of ourselves and start running these little self-help features like don't drive too fast.
If it snows, uh, you know, be careful in the streets, they could get slick.
If you have a skid, turn into the skid, all these things.
Now there's a new one up there, drink less this holiday season.
We should all we should all consume uh fewer adult beverages.
Uh, they there's some some British medical journey as journalists come up with a study that they've released over the size glass you the shape, the shape of the glass.
And the old standard highball glass is uh a round glass, not too tall, but then there's a there's a there's another glass that's being used, the tall boy, uh, which was something that uh, you know, your average I hop would serve iced tea in.
So the survey says that the traditional highball glass holds more liquor, more adult beverage than the tall gas.
So you drink your booze out of a tall glass, you'll have less liquor.
Now, would somebody explain if you're pouring the same amount of liquor in there in either glass, how is it less in one of the two glasses?
Now somebody might say, Well, in the tall boy, you're putting more mixer in there, be it water or whatever you use, uh, and it's going to dilute it more.
Uh um.
The difference in the in the in the in the you'd have to make sure that that was the case, that you had two different size glasses, but then you're you're you're talking about such things as as diluting the effect of alcohol with more all you people are gonna drink what they drink.
They they're w whatever they put it in.
My favorite people of the people don't even waste time with the glass.
You know, just gab the bottle, put it in a brown bag, and go out there.
Th those are the people that uh we need to reach.
Uh and of course, you know, telling them the you know, change the shape of the glass that they're using.
It's this this Nambi pamby nanny society that we have.
Don't drink too much, and of course, why have we why have we fewer office parties these these years?
I mean, office Christmas parties used to be huge.
They used to be big.
Everybody looked forward to it, and companies said, Well, we can't afford it anymore.
It's uh it's gotten too expensive and so on.
That wasn't the reason.
There's too many marriages are being busted up because all these workers were having affairs with each other at the parties.
I mean, that's that's that's what had that's why they had to reduce that's why a lot of corporations reduced the Christmas parties.
Because they were serving booze in the round flat glasses, and there was more booze in there in the tall glasses, and that would l that led to fewer inhibitions, and so people that you know had the hots for some honey in the office, never had the guts to tell her all year long, finally the office party would say, you know what?
I got the hots for you.
You get bold, you get brave.
And she said, Wow, that's cool.
And something came of it or not, but if it did, uh it had a little mushroom effect out there, and the office party became uh best way to bust up the marriages of your employees known to man.
All sanctioned in the holiday spirit.
I just I just I constantly marvel at how stupid uh they uh they they think we are with all of these warnings every year for the same thing.
Here's uh here's Sylvie in in Waldorf, Maryland.
Sylvie, I'm glad you called you are on open line Friday.
Hi, Russ.
Hi, Rush.
I am just outraged, outraged, outraged.
Two days before Christmas, and our local boy, Robert Stedham, who's from Waldorf, Maryland, he was the Navy uh sailor who was killed during the TWA Rome to Athens flight in nineteen eighty-five by uh Hezbollah.
Yes.
Hamadi, uh the one who killed him has been released by the German authorities after serving nineteen years in prison over there in Germany.
Yes.
And I I'm just outraged, and I think that we should definitely go to Lebanon and find this guy, an extern item to the United States.
I read in my local newspaper here a little fact that I didn't know before, which was that in 1987 Hamadi was carrying liquid explosives in his luggage in the Frankfort at the Frankfurt Airport, and this was two years after the TWA incident in the summer of 1985.
Where's the justice here?
And we need to do something to let German authorities know that this is completely wrong.
He's in Lebanon or somewhere around there, and the other three hijackers are were never found, and they have been free.
Hey, that's look for twenty years.
Wait a second.
I mean, I I'm not trying to make light of this, but little reality, that's nothing compared to what's going on in Iran.
One of the leaders of the group that held those Americans hostage is now the president of the company.
Our country.
Right.
I I I don't I I um I don't know, obviously, but I can't imagine that we're gonna hunt this guy down.
You never know.
If we're if our if our if our uh if our CIA still has some Jack Bauer types around, it may happen.
But we'll never know about it.
Uh is the thing.
I mean, you're never gonna get the satisfaction of knowing because if it does happen, it'll happen in a clandestine secret way.
The only way it'll be found out is if the Democrats find out about it and think that an outrage has been committed and tell everybody in the world that we did this and the country needs to apologize to the Hague and everybody else for it.
But I am looking I understand I understand your outrage, but uh you're dealing with a bunch of libs in Germany.
I mean, what what what do you what do you expect?
This this is the this is a part of the European Union that John Kerry, the Democrats want us to emulate.
Well, Rush, and one more thing.
My son is just starting to talk and he wants to say Merry Christmas, Rush.
Okay.
Christmas Rush.
Thank you, and a Merry Christmas to you too.
Hope you get oh hope you hope you get everything you want.
Thank you, Rush.
Okay, have a great day.
You too.
Bye bye.
Story out of Hillsborough, North Carolina, a sex toy and video mail order business once picketed by ministers and members of the cloth and searched by postal investigators, has been named the Business of the Year in Orange County, North Carolina.
PHE Inc., the parent company of Adam and Eve is a top citizen and major taxpayer, said Margaret Connell, the executive director of the Hillsborough Orange County Chamber of Commerce.
The business is also helped with a local animal shelter and a family violence prevention center.
We don't have any problems giving them our business of the year award, said the chamber president Robin Taylor Hall.
We don't look at some of the items they sell.
The company's product line includes videos and flavored sugar-free lubricants.
Products are available only by mail.
They moved to Hillsborough eleven years from Carborough, North Carolina at the time.
Ministers predicted the town proud of its colonial heritage would become a pornography capital.
This company has 325 employees and 70 million dollars in annual sales.
The president of PHE, Phil Harvey, said he believed the award shows acceptance by the community.
He also runs a nonprofit company that promotes family planning and aids prevention.
While selling sex toys and uh what is what it was uh uh what sugar-free lubricants.
This is probably big with diabetics.
Sugar-free lubricants.
At the same time, he's running a family planning and aids prevention place, charitable-based.
Company of the year, folks.
Company of the year in uh in Hillsborough, Orange County, North Carolina.
Here's Dan in Okinawa, Japan.
Dan, great to have you on the program today.
I I'm a long time listener, first time caller.
It's great to be on.
Thank you, sir.
I uh I'm a recent recipient of one of your top the soldier programs, and I just wanted to say thank you very much.
It's it's been an enormous reward out here.
I share it with all the fellow soldiers in my troop.
Well, I'll tell you, uh I'm I'm great grateful that it's uh it's meaningful to you, and I'm glad that you were able to uh be matched up with uh with a donor.
That's that was the intent.
I don't know uh when was the last time you were back home?
Um about a year ago.
You're how much American news do you get over there on a on a steady basis?
Well, they mix it up in an average day, I I'll see about a half hour uh CNN and about a half hour of Fox News, if I'm lucky.
Okay.
So you don't get as much as the steady diet in this country, but I'll I'll guarantee you that what you see probably angers you and infuriates you now and then, particularly military coverage.
And it has a lot of people.
This whole adopt a soldier program was the idea of a caller.
And the idea was to make available to people like you a steady diet of the truth, as opposed to the uh the propaganda here and the censorship.
I mean, the New York Times is censoring news.
To cover this NSA leak story, they are censoring news.
They are not reporting Clinton and Carter and their executive orders authorizing identical things that Bush has done.
They're not reporting it, because it would it would it would uh it would expose their original story as fraudulent.
So we got censorship of the news, and people over here are fed up with it, and a caller suggested this adopt a soldier program be a great idea for people to simply uh uh be able to get your website for uh uh complimentary subscription year basis.
And we've had people in the tens of thousands sign up as donors.
And we we continue to this day to match up qualified members of the military uh with donors, because it's a way for the American people to show their love and respect and admiration for what you do, uh, and they want to do this.
They want to reach out and show you how much your doing means to them, that you are appreciated uh far more than you will ever know.
So I'm glad that uh you availed yourself of the opportunity.
You will not be disappointed, sir.
Happy to have you part of the team.
We'll be back in just a moment.
Stay with them.
Open line Friday rolls on, 800 282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, this is Michael in Charlotte, Michigan.
Nice to have you with us.
Hello, Rush.
Hello, sir.
Yes.
Um my axiom axiom, which can be applied to all liberals, is the God you make is the God you must defend.
The God that made you need no defense.
With that said, I was wanting to know your opinion on the court rejecting the ability for high school teachers to mention intelligent design as an alternative uh viewpoint for how man came into being.
Well, you know, I have I have mixed emotions about this.
One thing it doesn't surprise me at all, just in the context of judicial activism.
That I think it's a another great example of of how we need uh different kinds of judges.
I mean, this is this is uh I know the case ended up before the guy, but these are the kinds of cases that school board had authorized a bunch of parents sued and it ends up before this judge, and this judge just discounts it on behalf of the district that he rules in, just discounts it.
On the other hand, I do think this.
I think that the people and I know why they're doing it, but I still think that it's a little bit disingenuous.
Uh let's make no mistake.
The people pushing intelligent design believe in the biblical version of creation.
Intelligent design is a a way, I think, to sneak it into the curriculum and make it less offensive to liberals because it's suspensively does not involve religious overtones, that there is this some intelligent being far greater than anything any of us can even imagine that's responsible for all this.
And of course, I don't have any doubt of that, but I I th I think that they're they're sort of pussyfooting around when they call it intelligent design.
Call it what it is.
You believe God created the world.
And and and you you uh you you think that it's warranted that this kind of uh theory for the explanation for all that is be taught.
On the other hand, uh I understand why they went with intelligent design because they knew that calling it what I just called it gave it no Chance.
So they wanted to sneak it in and at least have it exposed.
Well, they realize they're dealing with liberals here, and and liberals are intolerant when it comes to this.
You can you can find all kinds of uh reasons to explain this, be it radical egalitarianism or self-loathing or what have you.
I and I think there are equal amounts of both that go into explaining this.
But at the root of it is you have fear.
There's the the liberal cannot stand to be confronted with anything that would challenge the cocoon-like existence he or she has.
So anything that does bounces off the cocoon in which they live.
It's like a boundary that just doesn't permeate.
Fact or not, it doesn't permeate.
They they will not even consider it.
And when it threatens them, see, I think if they were firm in their belief, if they were confident in their belief that evolution explains everything, they wouldn't mind a competing point of view because they could knock it down.
They would relish the opportunity to defeat it.
But they are threatened by it precisely because they fear it, and they fear it because deep within themselves, they know that they're probably not right about this.
But they don't have the guts or the temerity, the courage to admit that.
You gotta understand who we're dealing with here.
And they have now structured things such as this.
Uh as let's say when 95% of the people of the country agree with something, five percent of the country disagrees.
The liberal will say the five percent must win because we can't hurt their feelings, we mustn't offend them.
They already feel left out.
We are excluding them from our society and our country.
We are excluding their views, and we can't do that.
And so the only fair thing to do is present nobody's views, except we will present our views, which don't threaten anybody because our views are the ones that everybody knows are right.
And these are the five to ten percent of the people that win the day on these kinds of arguments.
Because everybody is susceptible to the re the the the egalitarian uh argument.
The egalitarian argument goes sort of like this, that perfection is possible in every human being, and that when a human being comes along who is not perfect, a society that person deserves our sympathy, because that person who's not perfect is going to be shunned or made fun of or denied rights or what have you.
So the liberal will take those people, whoever they are, whatever their so-called affliction or their their uh behavior or existence that does not fit within the uh confines of what we define as normal, uh, and champion them and and will make them heroes and will turn them into into into in fact fearless crusaders against a tyrannical majority.
Uh and this is where I think the Christians in this country are are suffering.
They're viewed as a tyrannical majority forcing their way on people, demanding that their way be believed and followed and heard, when it's just the exact opposite.
It's n the the the Christian majority in this country is a majority because it's a majority, it's a majority because of numbers.
This is a democracy, a representative republic.
Uh and yet, when any of those, I don't care if it's a religious view or an environmental view or a political view, if it offends liberals who believe that nobody should go through life offended with hurt feelings, then it that whatever is going on to cause that's got to be stopped.
And uh they they end up making these arguments and they are based in emotion, and they're rooted at trying to permeate people's hearts.
Oh, yes, it's unfortunate they feel bad.
Well, okay.
But it's gone on and on and on to the for so long now that it's become apparent what it really is.
What the the effort that is underway here is to redefine the traditions and institutions that made the country great, and to say that those very traditions and institutions that made the country great actually led to a bad country.
We are not a fair country, we're an unjust country, we are mean-spirited, we're extremists, we are environmentalist uh destructors.
Uh we uh we destroyed a once pristine place uh that the great Native Americans uh uh protected with all of their being.
We're we we've we've come along, we've introduced racism, sexism, bigotry, homophobia, all these things in uh in society.
This is what the majority has done.
America is not a just country, America is not good, and any value that defines American traditions and institutions as good, therefore becomes subject of attack and assault on the part and by people uh who uh who are simply feeling left out, or like they're a little odd, or a little weird, uh, and the people who sympathize with them.
And that is why uh you will find various types and groups of people championed and embraced uh by the egalitarian left uh because they're the true crusaders, they're the ones that have courage, they're living in a place they don't like.
Be right back after this.
Stay with us.
Boy, I just barely made it out of that last segment.
Just enough time to say, hold on, we'll be back, folks.
▲
Export Selection