Rush Limbaugh Program - January 4, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

Jan. 4, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:23

January 4, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of The Rush 24-7 podcast.
	Well, you know, folks, it's just it's just real simple here from a purely analytical point of view.
	From a purely analytical point of view, the media prove time and time again they cannot be trusted to report the truth or the facts.
	Can't count on them anymore.
	First there was Katrina, we got forged documents, lies about the law regarding the NSA program.
	Now this terrible mine accident, time and again.
	They report false information and spin.
	They rely on rumored sources.
	Somebody shouts out a rumor, they run with it, they take it to the air.
	News standard in the media.
	Guy runs up and tells you something you don't know who your sources are, you don't know your source's name, you don't know anything about him, but you report it as news.
	And then when it's all proven to be untrue, you say, Oh, how awful.
	But there's never any official taking of responsibility.
	There's never any accountability.
	You've got these uh these these awful mine accident in this uh these minor families.
	It just just I mean, I don't know if I've how about you.
	I went to bed last night, right before I went to bed around midnight.
	Here comes the flash.
	Twelve of the thirteen miners found alive.
	I said, wow, this is a miracle.
	This is cool.
	Go up, get in bed, get up this morning, find out it wasn't true.
	Greetings and welcome, uh, ladies and gentlemen.
	You are tuned to the award-winning thrill packed, ever exciting, increasingly popular growing by leaps and bounds, Rush Limbaugh program.
	And we are here on the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
	The telephone numbers 800-282-2882.
	The email address is rush at EIB net.com.
	You know, I I I know, uh ladies and gentlemen, that I often chide uh many of you for wanting to call here and complain about what you saw in the media.
	Because I say, it's uh it happens every day.
	It's not news anymore.
	But I'd say there are days like this.
	I just get so disgusted, and I just get so frustrated about it that even I, and I'm allowed because I'm the head honcho here, uh, even I want to break my own rule.
	I mean, let's take a look at the media.
	This this is an industry that supposedly trades on facts, supposedly trades on truth.
	And if it can't be trusted, how is it any different than Enron or WorldCom?
	I mean, we are the consumers of this information, and if the information's repeatedly unreliable, then the product is defective, and those people selling it are dishonest.
	And I have I have made this this observation countless times.
	The news, you have to look at it the same way you look at any retail product on the shelf at your favorite store.
	It's product, it's packaged, it's assembled, it's marketed.
	The news today is not what happened.
	The news today is what reporters want to happen.
	The news today is propaganda.
	The news today is agenda-oriented.
	You can take a look at this Abramov scandal, it's all Republicans, and we don't know anything about it yet.
	It's supposedly all Republicans, and what let's see.
	Uh I've got I've got just a sh of uh did I put the I can't believe I would have put this in the bottom of the stack because I was going to talk about it at the time.
	All the various uh differences there are in the number of people the Abramov scandal could uh could touch and reach.
	Well, I'll find it here in just a second.
	I'm actually getting a little bit ahead of myself.
	Oh, look at that.
	Lynn Swan going to announce for Governor of Pennsylvania today.
	At any rate, I I the difference is I don't hold myself out as a journalist.
	I don't pretend to be a journalist.
	For one thing, I smile too much.
	For another thing, I'm happy too often.
	For the third thing, I'm optimistic.
	And I'm not looking for doom and gloom.
	I'm not looking for the horrible aspect of everything.
	I'm not looking to do any of that.
	I am a conservative.
	I have certain beliefs.
	My beliefs are based on history, tradition, values, and principle.
	But the media, the media pretend not to be influenced by any of this.
	They pretend to be merely the conduits through which fact and truth flow.
	They simply say they're objective.
	Why they have no agenda.
	Why they have and look at this guy rising from the New York Times yesterday.
	In the uh in his appearance on the Today Show, we played the sound bites from it.
	This guy's become an advocate.
	He's a pure nothing but advocate.
	He's not a journalist of any kind.
	While they what they pretend to be merely the conduits through which fact and truth flow, we know this to be false.
	And I'll tell you something, it's time for a serious debate in this country about the proper role of the news media.
	I know they have constitutional mention and protection.
	And I I I don't in any way favor government policing of the media the way the media favors government policing of political speech, by the way.
	I mean, the media is all out there in favor of the government policing political speech, because they know they're immune to it.
	They are immune from any changes that are made.
	But it is clear that self-policing isn't working either.
	There is no accountability.
	What of where are all the editors?
	Where are all the levels in this minor story, for example?
	We keep hearing that you can't trust talk radio.
	You can't trust Matt Drudge.
	You can't trust the internet because there aren't any filters.
	It's just a bunch of wackos doing what they want to do, advancing their own agenda.
	How is that really any different from what the mainstream media, the old media, is today?
	Where are the filters?
	Who are the filters?
	Well, the filters are no different than the reporters.
	They got the same agenda, they have the same purpose, but they deny it.
	The last thing they're interested in is fact.
	The last thing they're interested in is truth.
	They don't report what happened, they report what they want to happen.
	I mean, I don't even think it's professional anymore.
	The level of professionalism in the mainstream media has sunk now to new lows.
	People enter, you know why people enter the media today?
	Go into any journalism school.
	I've told you this.
	Walk down the hall at your favorite journalism school, ask some budding young newbile little journalism student with stars in his or her eyes.
	Why are you here?
	Because I want to change the world.
	Well, that's not what you're supposed to do in journalism.
	Journalism standing on the corner and telling people who aren't there what happened there if something noteworthy does happen there.
	No, no, no, no.
	I want to change the world.
	All that means is they don't go into journalism to report the news anymore.
	They go into journalism to influence policy.
	That's what James Ryzen's all about at the New York Times.
	It's what Dan Radder was all about.
	Mary Mapes told all these reporters who covered Katrina were all about, and it was all about attacking Bush and his policies.
	Vanity Fair magazine has got this puff piece coming out on the prosecutor's prosecutor, Patrick Fitzgerald.
	They don't give a damn about Patrick Fitzgerald.
	They're using him as an excuse to attack Bush.
	The media don't care about John Mertha.
	He can't keep himself off the news.
	He's become uh addicted to his camera time, FaceTime, and his 15 minutes of fame times ten.
	They don't care about John Mertha personally, and they never did care about Mertha until he became their useful idiot and started allowing them to advance their own agenda.
	We know now, for example, the death toll resulting from Hurricane Katrina was not only smaller than originally reported, but that it was not disproportionately minorities who died from the hurricane and the flooding.
	We know that just the opposite of what was reported happens to be true.
	Katrina, that hurricane, just another event that was used through lies and shabby reporting to attack Bush, to accuse him of racism, incompetence, lack of compassion, and all that.
	And the media are in the midst of losing respect, and they deny it.
	They're living in utter denial, they've created this false universe, this alternative reality in which they live.
	They have become disreputable.
	They pretend they're reporting news when in fact they first and foremost promote their own agenda.
	I don't I don't think, in fact, I don't think they give a damn about the news at all.
	I think they use events in this country to try to promote their agenda.
	The news doesn't mean anything to them.
	The minor story was you wait, it won't be long before we get stories of why didn't Bush care?
	Why does Bush not want to change this?
	Even though there are stories out there about how there have been improvements in mind safety, you wait.
	In order to get the attention of their their their disastrous reporting of last night off the front pages and off everybody's uh uh focus.
	They'll find a way to turn this into an examination of Bush policies, how Bush doesn't care about union people.
	I don't know how it's going to manifest itself, but it will at some point.
	Because every event that takes place in this country is used to promote their agenda.
	Every event is an opportunity to lecture us about some social policy or take sides politically.
	They are propagandists.
	I mean, look at how the revelation of Valerie Plame's name and this current leak are treated.
	In one case, whoever leaked Valerie Plaim's Name, why, why?
	We've got to put those people in jail.
	Why that's outrageous.
	Giving up a covert identity agent's identity.
	It never happened.
	She wasn't covert.
	How many times does this need to be reported?
	If she wasn't covert, no crime has been charged.
	And yet, the real scum that leaked this NSA story are being portrayed as whistleblowers and heroes in the New York Times as an editorial today saying, we must understand the difference between whistleblowers and leakers.
	And these whistleblowers must be treated with great care and great respect.
	Look at how the media won't even report honestly about the travesty that is the Tom DeLay case.
	Look at how history completely is ignored.
	Abraham Lincoln, FDR, and others when accusing Bush of seizing power, he has actually refused to do.
	Bush didn't seize all the power that he inherently has.
	Go back and look at what Lincoln did, FDR did.
	Do you know that FDR, I was going to mention this yesterday.
	FDR actually had every letter from soldiers sent home opened and read and censored and monitored.
	Yes, FDR did this during World War II.
	If not every letter, quite a few of them.
	Soldiers' letters home were opened and read.
	You never knew who might be sending in what?
	We were at war.
	And you imagine what if if something like that were happening today.
	You imagine the outcry.
	But the historical perspective on all this is lost.
	Just like Bush lied about free war intel and weapons of mass destruction.
	We have documented countless times, I don't know how many times, on this program alone.
	All the things back in 1998 uttered by Bill Clinton and every Democrat that's in the Senate today that was in the Senate then.
	We've gone back and chronicled for you what the New York Times, the Washington Post, the magazines and networks all said back then.
	It's identical to what's being said about Iraq leading up to our war, but you would not know it if you watched the big media because history began for them in 2001.
	What happened in the past?
	I don't care if it's Lincoln, I don't care if it's FDR, as recently as 1998.
	They don't care.
	Doesn't fit the agenda.
	They're not reporting news.
	They're not giving perspective.
	They are advancing an agenda.
	They are propagandists, and I've got more, but I have to take a break.
	We'll be back in just a moment.
	See where the nags are all upset today about uh Alito?
	All the nags are fit to be tied.
	They're out there squealing on the war path.
	I think I know why the ABA, the American Bar Association, has given Sam Alito its highest rating.
	The Libs used to used to rely on the ABA to either decline or to disapprove somebody, and that would give them ammo.
	But uh this this does not help them.
	Look, we'll get on to all this stuff in uh in in due course.
	But if you you look at look at the uh the media with the economy.
	We've y they jump all over Bush.
	When the economy has slowed, they pay minimal attention to the great economic indicators today.
	We have a credibility gap.
	And I can calculate the credibility gap because I know numbers and I know economics.
	We have an economy right now that in in in uh any other time with a Democrat president.
	You go out and take a poll in the economy today, and the people of this country rate the economy good or great by a tune of 65, 70 percent.
	Mainstream media gets hold of it today, shapes their questions, shapes their sample.
	You get an approval number of 45% in in a booming economy.
	Look what happened yesterday, got hold of some leaked notes that the Federal Reserve's gonna stop raising rates, stock markets spiked yesterday, huge bump up, all the indexes did.
	I mean, it's it's it's it's terrific out.
	Unemployment is down.
	Home buying has never been easier for most people in the country, snurdly excluded.
	Uh and yet the reporting on this is that the economy's dismal.
	We've even got there was a story that I saw today that some expert somewhere is predicting a recession.
	This is just utterly irresponsible.
	So you can find one pointy headed academic elitist who wants to be first in line to predict bad news, and there you oh, well, we got a guy predicting bad news.
	Why, he's our hero today.
	Let's go out and report this.
	Let's go out and make the central economic story the fact that there's a recession lingering in the future here.
	Look how they report liberal demagoguery when oil and gas prices go up.
	They repeat the lies about windfall profits when there aren't any.
	Barely a word, though, when prices go down As a result of supply and demand.
	In fact, it's even worse than that.
	Prices will drop 50 cents, 75 cents a gallon.
	No reporting on it.
	After that drop has taken place, they'll jump up two or three cents.
	They'll get a story about how gas prices are rising.
	With no reporting on how they came down.
	Because of supply and demand, because of the great American economy, because of capitalism.
	No news.
	Zilch Zero Nada.
	Look how they focus on the homeless.
	When a Republican is president, they all but disappear when a Democrat's problem.
	There aren't any homeless.
	There's no homeless problem when the Democrats in the White House.
	Now we got a story in the stack today.
	Somebody's actually suggesting if you give the homeless a bunch of booze, it'll make their lives more enjoyable.
	The Canadians.
	The Canadians say, oh, yeah, give them some sherry and give them some wine and it'll you'll improve their quality of life.
	And this is touted as revolutionary, revelationary.
	This is touted as advanced and elitist and ahead of the curve.
	Look how they slobber all over the Clintons.
	Bill Clinton never received a majority vote of the people this country.
	Hillary hadn't even been nominated yet.
	They may as well be king and queen of this country as far as the media is concerned.
	They're trying to nominate McCain on the Republican side with endless fawning coverage of his independence.
	And they only like McCain's independence because that's independence from the president and the conservative agenda.
	McCain thinks they like him personally, just like Mertha thinks they like him personally.
	Just like Fitzgerald's gonna end up thinking they like him personally when it's not personal at all.
	It's about their agenda.
	It's about their propaganda.
	It's about turning these people into useful idiots.
	And they just willingly, almost sick of fantly go along with it.
	Or sick of fantishly, whatever the correct word is.
	I mean, I look for I can go on and on here, and I intend to go on and on.
	My point is that we um not not that we should or should ignore the should not ignore the media.
	Uh the point is that we should take note of the fact that the media are not what they say they are.
	They are not journalists seeking the truth and seeking facts.
	That is false advertising.
	They have a defective product.
	They are losing the respect of the public.
	They've lost it in West Virginia now.
	They are losing credibility the way any dishonest company and profession does.
	I mean, you go to bed thinking twelve miners are alive, only to wake up the next day to find out that all but one of them is dead.
	It's shocking.
	It's stunning, it's completely irresponsible.
	It was unnecessary.
	But some guy comes running up, they're all alive, they're all alive.
	Bam!
	The pressure's on to be first with the news.
	So that the TV blogs on the internet will credit you with being first.
	Forget that your audience is the American people.
	No, your audience is other journalists.
	Your audience is other networks.
	Your audience is a bunch of dumb, stupid bloggers on the internet who are reporting on what you do.
	So now, in the face of this crisis of West Virginia, what will the media do?
	Well, I'll predict to you we'll get another panel discussion at Harvard, or at the Kennedy School, at the Shore and Stam Center, or wherever.
	Marvin Calb will uh will moderate.
	He will lament how bad the news media is.
	Not the news media, the new media.
	He will lament that all this pressure is brought about by people like me and Matt Drudge and Talk Radio.
	Because there's not time to do instant checking anymore.
	They're just the old media's ways.
	I just, we don't have time because they're constantly under assault.
	So the focus will be on how the new media is causing the old media to make mistakes.
	We'll hear about how full of professionals the old media is.
	We'll hear all about checks and balances and all the rest of the baloney, and they'll pat themselves on the back with the usual arrogance and sanctimony we've come to expect.
	They'll tell everybody how they try to do what's right, how they try to report the news, but they're not perfect.
	And of course, with all this pressure being brought to bear by these irresponsible hacks on the radio and on the internet who have no filters, why it's tougher than ever.
	Why Dan Rather comes out with a perfectly good story on documents saying Bush never went to the National Guard, and lo and behold, Dan Rather's attack.
	Why, Dan Rather became the news.
	And we haven't faced this before.
	And this is something we don't know how to deal with.
	Dan rather should not be part of ignoramuses.
	Dan rather has made himself a part of the news since the day he got into the business.
	Dan Rather has been the news.
	That's the whole point of any television journalist today is to be the news.
	Ask yourself when you look at a TV ad promoting some new anchor or new show.
	The focus is Always on the personality.
	Not the fact that you get the news factually or truthfully or best, but that there's some anchor out there that's going to dazzle you and wow you and get you all excited to watch their network.
	Meanwhile, we don't know what credentials the anchor has.
	We don't know what experience he had, other than he cried good on TV during Hurricane Katrina.
	He looked like he really cared, and he was really tough on the government, the Bush administration government.
	They pat themselves on the back, all the arrogance and sanctimony that they can manage.
	Tell everybody how they try to do what's right, but in the end they take no responsibility at all for what they do.
	Michael Isakoff and flushing Korans down the toilet at Guantanamo Bay.
	No responsibility whatsoever.
	They just complain about sourcing and debate whether we need one, two, or three, unnamed or named Yip Yip Yahoo.
	Ha, welcome back.
	It's the EIB network, America's anchor man, El Rushbo sitting firmly here behind the golden EIB.
	Microphone, we will be getting to your phone calls in due course.
	800 282-2882 is a phone number.
	You would like to be on the program.
	Let's look at this Abramoff investigation.
	Already, the media are treating it as a Republican scandal almost exclusively.
	The fact is that we know that both Dingy Harry and Helmet Head, uh, Byron Dorgan may have problems.
	Reed is the Senate Democrat leader.
	But they're reporting it this way because they want it to be a Republican scandal.
	Some news reports are even saying Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
	We know for a fact he spread money around to both parties.
	I have three little bits of information here.
	Apparently, the Detroit Free Press is reporting today that uh Carl Levin, Senator Carl Levin, Democrat, took thousands of dollars from Abrafov's Abramoff's firm back then, uh, and and from his client, the Saginaw Chippewa Indian tribe.
	In exchange for that, the Indian tribe got a lot for their money, at least three million dollars.
	According to the Helena Independent Record, Levin wrote a letter with Debbie Stabenow, also a liberal Democrat U.S. Senator from Michigan, urging and pressuring Senator Conrad Burns Appropriations Committee to give three million dollars to the Saginaw Chippewas, one of America's wealthiest tribes which didn't need the money.
	Today's droid Detroit Free Press says that Levin admits that he asked for the three million dollars.
	Okay, so Levin's gonna be tainted.
	Then we have new evidence emerging.
	This is uh John Solomon is a great reporter, by the way, AP, and Solomon, I have to tell you, my experience is interested in truth and facts.
	There are exceptions to this, of course.
	Uh, new evidence is emerging that the top Democrat on the Senate committee currently investigating Abramov got political money arranged by the lobbyist back in 2002, shortly after the lawmaker took action favorable to Abramov's tribal clients.
	That would be old Helmet Head Byron Dorgan.
	Now, this is from uh November 29th, 2005, and I remember reporting this story when I saw it then.
	Uh Carl Levin today and the Detroit Free Press.
	And back in November on the on the 17th.
	Uh, we have uh we have evidence about other Democrats involved in this, particularly uh Harry Reed.
	Uh Senator John Brough might be involved.
	Mary Landrew uh uh sent a letter uh helpful to uh an Abramov client.
	The point is that, yeah, you can find this stuff in local newspapers, but the big media, the Washington, New York, Boston corridor reporting on this stuff ignores everything I have just told you.
	You would not know that there is a Democrat involved.
	This is a pure Republican scandal.
	It is nothing more than that, and they've got all their eggs wrapped up in this basket now.
	They've gone for the National Guard, they've gone to lying about weapons of mass destruction, they've gone to lying about pre-war intel, Valerie Plame, you name it.
	Now they're on to Abramoff, all their eggs in this basket.
	The problem for them is that this is coming at a time when the Alito confirmation hearings are coming up, and the media's gonna have a tough time deciding what they put their eggs, what basket they put their eggs in.
	We may have them cornered here, folks, because they're trying to spend so much time creating scandal out of virtually every event in Washington, D.C., that they may not have enough time to devote to what they obviously think is most important.
	In this case, I think would have to be a leito, uh, unless they've been taken off track.
	Here's some numbers from various media sources, the Wall Street Journal saying that the Abramov scandal could implicate 60 lawmakers.
	The New York Times says that the Abramov scandal could affect a dozen lawmakers.
	The Washington Post today says the Abramov scandal might affect about half a dozen House and Senate members.
	USA Today says at least twelve lawmakers, and the New York Post as many as twenty Congress members and staffers.
	Well, what are you to make of all this?
	What are we to make?
	Nobody knows anything yet.
	It's pure speculation.
	There's not a thing that happened.
	At some point, the DOJ, uh, the prosecutors are going to release what they've got, because Abramov's gonna sing.
	Abramov, what Abramov's interested in now is reducing the amount of time and the kind of time that he spends.
	He would love to be sent to one of these little retirement villages down in Florida they call a federal prison, even if it is for ten years instead of thirty.
	Oh, he would love that.
	So he's gonna sing.
	But you know that there's there's one aspect of this that I think people uh need to keep in mind.
	You look at who the media has anointed already as the presidential nominees from each party, Hillary on the left and McCain on the right.
	Okay?
	If this Abramov scandal turns out to be as big, I've heard a number as high as 300 people in Washington, counting staffers, congressmen, senators, who knows.
	But I don't care who it is.
	And by the way, you know, can you go back to the uh the 96 era?
	Uh uh, about that time all the heat was being turned up on Johnny Chung and John Huang and all of the funny money that came in from communist China to the Clinton campaign.
	What did Clinton do?
	Clinton ran, I think we need campaign financial for Clinton acting like he was innocent, he was a victim, he had no idea, and by God, he was gonna get to the bottom of this.
	Clean it up.
	Republicans are probably do much the same, uh, but there is there is uh a slight difference in the uh in the two approaches, and the difference is that the Bush administration, as opposed to the Clinton administration, is going to apparently do everything it can to get to the real bottom of this when the purpose of the Clinton administration and Janet Reno was to protect the Clinton people from any in So all these people in the Chinese scandal fled the country never to be found again before they could testify or um or be uh subpoenaed or arrested or what have you.
	Uh but here's here's the bottom line.
	If, and I say if, because we don't know, but if this turns out to be as big as people say, do you realize that the resulting damage may be such that no member of Congress or the Senate will have a prayer of winning a party nomination or being elected president?
	If this is that big, now just stick with me on this, Mr. Snerdley.
	If this is that big, what if it taints Mrs. Clinton?
	What if it what if some of this stuff ends up tainting some of these people?
	What if the whole Congress appears to be corrupt, not just the people on Abramov's scandal?
	What if the way this comes down?
	Now we don't know yet, we don't know.
	But if Congress, if the whole legislative branch ends up being tarred and feathered by this, as if as in everybody saying, a pox on all their houses, uh, the odds that one of those people is going to get the presidential nominate or be elected by the people of this country is that's a long shot.
	An analogy, Mr. Sturdley, would be imagine any of the members of the House Bank scandal being nominated by their party for the presidential nomination and winning the race a year or two later.
	It just isn't gonna happen.
	It wasn't gonna same thing with the House Post Office.
	So, I mean, there, you know, the media, these these fools, they demand this independent prosecutor to put reporters in jail, and now that's out of the box, and that's in the works now.
	And now you've got all these reporters running around acting like advocates and trading in secrets with leakers and so forth.
	And we've got this DOJ investigation of what happened to the NSA piece.
	These people may, and I still think in the once the Libby trial begins, the media is gonna be on trial as much as anybody else in that case, including Libby.
	But uh, you know, this is a could be a case to be careful what you ask for.
	Let me ask you this.
	When When's the last time you read a story about the generosity of the American people?
	About how they give billions of dollars in charity and taxes to people all over the world.
	You know, you don't hear about that.
	Instead, we get story after story about how foreign governments, socialist governments in Europe, and totalitarian third world governments hate us.
	Hugo Chavez celebrated as a hero.
	The French Jacques Chirac and Germans, the Germany's Schroeder.
	Why these people are held up as icons.
	Nelson Mandelic can run around ripping the United States left and right.
	He wouldn't be alive today if it weren't for the United States of America.
	South Africa wouldn't be what it is today if it weren't for the United States of America.
	The people of Africa have it far better off than they would on their own, as do all people all over the world because of the generosity of the United States citizen and taxpayer, our prosperity resulting from freedom and capitalism producing our wealth and prosperity, which allows us to share it, donate it.
	Never a story about that.
	All we get is how rotten we are.
	How mean spirited, how racist.
	And how the third world hates our country and how Western Europe hates our country, and we get stories of what's wrong with us.
	Why do we have such a rotten image?
	And it all goes back to Bush when we don't have a rotten image around the world.
	When is the last time that you read or heard stories about how free enterprise, free markets, capitalism has fed more people, created more wealth than any other system on the face of the earth?
	You don't.
	You don't see these kinds of stories in this country.
	You will never see praise for the way this country operates.
	Instead, you get story after story about how we pollute and how we destroy the planet and we're creating global warming and we're causing people to die early and lose their islands or sinking into the ocean.
	We are using up the world's resources.
	We're destroying the planet.
	The theme of the modern media today is we are destroying the planet.
	We are saving the planet.
	We are the ones who've made the planet great.
	We have fed more people, we've created more wealth.
	We have provided more jobs and opportunity.
	If we are destroying the world, if we're destroying the planet, if we're such heathens, if we're so hated, why do we have an immigration problem?
	When's the last time you read a story or heard a news report about how pharmaceutical companies were praised for inventing life-saving, life-enhancing miracle medicines?
	Never don't get these stories at all.
	Instead, we get story after story about how we need to give free drugs to whomever wants them because big pharmaceutical actually is killing people.
	They're producing drugs that kill people, and they don't care.
	All they care about is profit.
	They're no different in the eyes of the media than big tobacco.
	Take a look at the media's big enemies today.
	You'll find WorldCom, you'll find Enron, you'll find big oil, you'll find big partautical, you'll find big retail.
	All of the success stories in this country become the enemy of the partisan media today and the American left, who are not reporting facts, who are not reporting truth.
	They are not reliable, they are disreputable, they are propagandists.
	Pure and simple, that's what they have become.
	When's the last time that you read a story or heard a news report about how 18, 19, and 20-year-old red-blooded Americans put their own careers and family interests aside, even 35 and 40-year-old husbands or wives to voluntarily risk their lives to liberate millions of people they've never known, never met in a faraway place in the middle of nowhere, Afghanistan and Iraq.
	When do you see those?
	You don't.
	Oh, all we get, that would be a hell of a story, and it would make the country feel good because it's true, it's factual, but no, no, no, no.
	We get stories about how these people are nothing but rednecks, and they're uneducated, and they have no hope because this country's a dismal failure, and they have to join the military because otherwise they'll never get an education and never get a job.
	They don't want to join the military because they believe in their country.
	They have no other option.
	That's the story we get.
	They're a bunch of hick hay seeds with gun racks in the back of a pickup truck running around picking turnips, and that's the only future they've got.
	That's the story we get about them.
	We don't get the truth about them.
	We don't get praise for them.
	Oh, but when they start dying, then all of a sudden the same people who impugn them day in and day out care About them.
	But they don't care about them.
	It's just another opportunity to hammer the Bush administration and defeat this policy that's oriented around defending the country against worldwide terrorism.
	When's the last time you read a story or heard a news report about what a terrific job law enforcement and intelligence folks are doing protecting our nation from another 9-11 attack?
	When's the last time you you have never seen that story, and you won't see that story because instead what you will get story after story about how the ACLU and some political hack thinks our civil liberties are being violated, and we're destroying our country.
	We are losing our freedoms, all because George Bush wants to spy on Americans.
	Or the latest we Republicans are only fighting the war on terror because we are cowards and we can't deal with a couple of our buildings being blown up.
	We're not mature.
	That's the way of the world now.
	And if we're going to run around acting afraid that it'll happen again, why we can't be trusted elite.
	That's the latest Democrat Party line.
	Watch for it.
	It's coming soon.
	I got to take another break.
	Back here in just a second.
	Stay with us.
	Okay, to the phones we go.
	We got some time to squeeze a couple in here, maybe.
	Uh first up is Sue from Los Angeles.
	Welcome, Sue, to the EIB network.
	Hello.
	Yes, hi.
	Hi.
	I hear you fine.
	Yeah, we're waiting.
	Yeah, yeah, yeah.
	I was watching when you were long after you went to bed.
	I was watching uh CNN and Fox till three in the morning because I was looking for the source of the news that they were all alive, and finally the source came on and they uh was announced.
	They said that the mining company officials had gone in to the church and told them that they were all alive.
	So they're actually the source of the information, not the media.
	You're totally right about the media, and I hate to see your point.
	Discredited on or discounted because of this one issue.
	Well, I'm not gonna be dis I'm I'm not gonna be discredited on this one issue.
	But see, if I turn out to be wrong, I have no problem admitting it.
	And I'll take responsibility for what my mistakes are, and I'll I'll be accountable to myself.
	Okay.
	But I but but uh there are ways to avoid this.
	Let's listen to look we're not talking about what happened three hours later.
	Three hours later, that's enough time to get it right in the first place.
	Let's go to the audio soundbite, shall we, ladies and let's go to audio soundbite number one.
	I don't mean to pick on anybody here.
	It's just it's just uh is this who we have?
	Anderson Cooper.
	This is last night around 10 minutes to 12 noon on CNN.
	Wow.
	The families we're told are screaming that uh some family members scream that 12 people were found alive.
	Uh that is uh a number of people have been yelling and screaming, 12 alive, 12 alive.
	Sir, what have you heard?
	Please come tell us.
	All right, so yelling and screaming, uh bunch of unnamed sources, unconfirmed sources.
	Yellow they're alive, they're alive, they're alive.
	Of course, now everybody wants to hear that news.
	I mean, I'd everybody that's the news everybody was waiting and hoping to hear.
	But this is how it gets reported.
	A bunch of people running around the street, and Cooper snags this one guy.
	It turns out his name is Terry Goff.
	He's a friend of the trapped miner Terry Helms.
	And uh, here's that exchange.
	You're a friend of Terry Helms.
	Terry was what have you heard?
	They just come out of the box.
	So we got 12 lives.
	That where did you who told you that?
	They just come out of the mind.
	And Senator Fisherdale.
	So we got twelve lies.
	Uh that is uh incredible news.
	Okay, so now some of you might say, Well, Russ, what are they gonna do?
	It's breaking news.
	When you are in the truth business, when you're in the truth and fact business, you're supposed to be immune to all these be first with it pressures and so forth, and just standing around the streets waiting for people running through the streets to tell you what they have heard, and then reporting it as fact is where they got into trouble.
	If now three hours later it finally is learned, well, these people were told by an official from the mines.
	Uh what happened three hours later is simply the okay.
	Well, here's our excuse.
	Here's our excuse.
	Uh, these these uh took us three hours to run it down, but uh it still was premature.
	It was not true what was reported, and the sourcing on this, uh, folks, it's no different than the kind of stuff that gave us the reports coming out of New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina.
	We'll be back in just a moment.
	You know I'm right.
	We have some more sound bites to play for you on this.
	Plus, the president was good today uh this morning talking about Iraq and Afghanistan.
	We have audio sound bites from there.
	And I when you listen to him, it'll confirm for you, I think uh uh the opinions I gave you yesterday explaining how the president operates and the way he thinks about his job.

▲