All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 4, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:17
January 4, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
HR just sent me something I'd forgotten about this.
It's fabulous.
Greetings.
Welcome back, America's anchor man, L. Rushball, the all-knowing, all caring, all sensing, all feeling, all concerned.
Maha Rushi.
Dealing with facts.
Dealing with truth.
It's a relentless and unstoppable pursuit of the truth.
Each day.
If you have a problem with the truth, you're gonna go nuts listening to this program.
Phone numbers 800-282-2882.
Looking forward to talking to you.
Continuing on with the theme about the mainstream press being nowhere near a factual, truthful business anymore.
Continuing on with the theme that the media today reports the news as they hope it turns out, rather than reporting the news as it is.
We went back.
H HR found some uh interesting stuff from the uh January 10th ninth 2005 Newsweek.
This is a January uh yeah, January 10th Newsweek issue.
It was just a little after 7 p.m. on election night 2004.
The network exit polls showed John Carrey leading George Bush in both Florida and Ohio by three points.
Carrie's age were confident that the Democratic candidate would carry these key swing states.
Bush had not broken 48% in Carrie's recent tracking polls.
The age were a little hesitant to interrupt Carrie as he was fielding satellite TV interviews in a last to get out the vote push.
Still, the seven o'clock exit polls were considered to be reasonably reliable.
Time to tell the candidate the good news.
Carrie had slept only two hours the night before.
He was sitting in a small hotel room at the Weston Copley.
In a small irony of history, next to the next door to the hotel where his grandfather, a boom and bust businessman, shot himself some eighty years ago.
Bob Schrum, Carrie's friend and close advisor, couldn't resist the moment.
May I be the first to say, Mr. President, said Shrum.
Well, we came to learn later that the Libs had stacked their own exit polls.
The Libs had sent people out there to participate in exit polls, and they stacked them, and they did this for the express purpose of demoralizing people who hadn't yet voted.
And they wanted the reporting of these early exit polls starting at two o'clock and then the updates at 4, 430, to depress Bush vote turnout.
And then when the actual returns, when the actual votes started being counted and the exit polls showed no relevance, the media was beside itself.
They were stunned.
Not just the Democrats, but it in a clear-cut example of reporting the news they hoped would be.
They forgot that votes are what's counted, not exit poll tallies.
Then after that, if you remember, some Democrats demanded an investigation of the real vote because of the disparity in the exit polling results.
That was the first conspiracy they seized on.
Well, this has to be something wrong with the actual vote count.
We know Republicans steal elections.
And don't forget the um the the psychological disorder of uh of projection.
Democrats accuse us primarily of things they do themselves.
They're out there alleging and charging vote fraud.
And it was absurd.
It was patently absurd.
You know, media picked it up and ran with yes, this is a reasonable story.
We're gonna run with this, we're gonna explore this.
The great disparity between the exit polls and the actual votes is so great that we must examine the actual votes.
In the exit polls, anybody can come out and tell you anything they want to.
I can lie to you.
You know, lying to exit pollsters is uh is a fun thing to encourage people to do, just to screw these people up.
The real votes what counts.
But no, since it didn't show Carrie winning.
They had to find some reason to find fault with the real vote and assume the exit polling was accurate.
All right, let me go back to the audio sound bites.
Uh we have two more bites here.
This uh both are from CNN, uh, and we've shared with the first two.
The first the first reports about 1150 last night.
CNN, and they all did it.
I'm not we just have audio from CNN.
I'm not I'm not picking on just one here.
Miners are alive, miners are alive, people running through the streets, miners are alive, gets reported.
Bamo.
And a friend comes up to Anderson Cooper.
Yeah, yeah, they just came out of the mines.
We got 12 alive.
There you have it.
The miners are alive.
Happy New Year.
Let's all sing amazing grace.
Now it's 247 this morning.
Anderson Cooper live from West Virginia speaking to an unidentified woman, and she had this exchange with him.
There's only one there's only one made it out alive.
And the rest of that name was Randall Ware.
The governor's in there, and this big in-charge CEO of the mine is apologizing.
And it's all they've did nothing but I don't know how this information could come out that this bigger.
There's one person alive, and he's already moved to the hospital.
So this morning, um, a West Virginian decided to lecture the media on what they did.
This is a woman who doesn't live in the media bubble, like I was talking about yesterday.
Just like they did at Hurricane Katrina, big media totally out of control here.
What happened to their editors?
Where were all these filters that we've been lectured about and told that we don't have?
We're not responsible.
We can't be trusted.
We don't have editors, we don't have filters.
We don't have people making sure that rumors are not true.
We don't have people checking our sources.
Where is all that these days?
In the mainstream media.
Why why didn't they need two or three sources on this last night?
But it doesn't seem fair.
Sure, there might have been this quote miscommunication error, but but why did why did it get broadcasted all over the world?
Why didn't somebody stop it?
When we came in, they were singing amazing grace right here in front of the church, and I'll fly away.
Right.
You know?
For three hours.
But everyone threw this.
It's it's it's unbelievable how.
I mean, where's the compassion in that?
That went on for three hours.
Children, young children, obviously, you young children.
Just yeah.
It's a small community.
It's a small community.
How could this how could nobody have compassion to say just hold on for a minute?
Something there's there's an error in uh the survivor something.
It's unbelievable.
Uh no, madam, it's not unbelievable.
It's commonplace.
We got this is the exact kind of thing it happened in Hurricane Katrina, the aftermath there.
Same exact kind of thing.
Same exact kind of thing we get in uh in in too many stories these days.
And it's it's I think it it's symptomatic uh of the lack of professionalism and uh attention to detail.
This is this is this is a a business which is failing its consumers.
And of course now the the excuse today what is the excuse today?
Well, how did what the the story is what, Mr. Sturdley, that somebody, the original error is somebody overheard some a foreman of a mine overheard a conversation and called a family member in a church, and that started this whole uh this whole uh snowball.
So a foreman overheard a phone call between a family member and somebody, spread the word in the church over what he thought he had heard, and that became the uh the the source of the genesis of this story that the miners were alive and uh twelve of the thirteen had survived and had been uh had been rescued.
Uh now isn't isn't it I'm surprised it hadn't happened yet.
You may be more informed than I. Are you sure some mine executive is not being blamed for?
This oh, this guy, the foreman, the foreman was in the command center and he heard a company.
Oh, okay.
So you got you got a guy listening in on a conversation, one side of a conversation.
He's not on the phone himself, he's overhearing a phone conversation, one guy.
One's one yeah.
Overheard.
Okay.
All right.
So oh so um, well, there that that's that's that's that's figures.
I mean, that's that's how news ends up being uh reported these days.
Now you might say, well, Rush, what actually is wrong with this?
Because everybody wants these people to be alive.
Yeah, that's no question about it, but here you might you might just say, okay, we've we've heard what we want to hear, let's run with it.
But it clearly wasn't verified.
Uh that's that's the bottom line.
A quick timeout.
We will be back.
Telephone numbers you want to be on the program is 800-282-2882.
Stay with us.
Okay, the president uh back on television today at the Pentagon addressing the war on terror.
We have a couple of sound bites, and I want to I just want to put this in context for you, set it up.
Uh mentioned yesterday that uh a lot of questions during the week that I was out.
Uh, why Bush doesn't respond more, why Bush doesn't respond to the critic.
Why why isn't Bush immersed in the media bubble like we all are?
Why doesn't and I try to tell people the media reality is not his.
He he He doesn't get up every day and immerse himself in the news and figure, okay, I gotta do this, this, and this, and this based on what he sees on television.
He does his job based on what he thinks is best for the country as president of the United States, according to the constitutional duties, oath of office, and this sort of thing.
And what happens in the media to him is a side show.
It really is.
He is utterly confident that he's doing the right thing and it's gonna work out.
He has an inner confidence.
He has an inner calm about him that just he's doing the right thing.
It's going to work out.
No matter what these naysayers, uh, these little ankle biting chihuahuas inside the beltway happen to be saying every day.
He thinks it's going to work out.
He believes in the real world and the people who live in it, not people who create alternative realities.
So given that, listen to these two bites.
Uh first bite a portion of his remarks today, talking about fighting the war and how we're winning it despite what the media is telling you.
Just because the elections went forward that doesn't mean the Saddamists, Zarkawi types are gonna lay down their arms.
They're not.
There'll still be violence.
And there'll still be some who believe that they can affect the political outcome of Iraq through violent means.
We understand that.
And we're gonna stay on the offense against these.
We being coalition forces as well as the Iraqi forces.
But the recent elections have served as a real defeat for the rejectionists and the Saddamists and Al Qaeda types.
Al Qaeda thinks they can use Iraq as a safe haven from which to launch attacks.
That's their stated objective.
I'm not making this up.
This is what uh uh Zarwahiri and Zarkawi discussed.
They said, Let's drive America out of Iraq so we can use Iraq as a safe haven.
We're gonna train Iraqis, we'll train their army and train their police, and at the same time, we've got some of the finest soldiers ever on the hunt to bring Zarkawi and his buddies to justice.
You notice the president is always talking realistically and optimistically about our chances and about the future there because he knows we're the United States of America.
We don't lose when we put our mind to it.
We're the United States of America.
But yet on the on the other side of this is we can't win, we have no business being there, we're there on a lie, we're there on a fraudulent basis.
These are nothing more than freedom fighters trying to oust us, they're the moral equivalent of our founding fathers, all this rot gut that you hear from uh from the left.
You have Saddam Hussein basically articulating the same things Democrats in the United States are saying about his defense in his defense.
It's just it's it's it's two different worlds.
And the president is on the offensive now, and he's basically saying, Don't listen to what you hear, listen to what I'm telling you.
One more bite on this.
We're gonna continue to conduct anti-terrorist operations in Afghanistan as well.
This is a part of a global war against the terrorist network.
I said after September the eleventh, we would do everything in our power to bring justice to the enemy that attacked the American people.
And I'm in it.
And part of chasing down the Taliban and and Al Qaeda is to find them where they hide.
I'm sorry.
And just like in Iraq, we're gonna have our special forces stay on the hunt.
And we'll continue training at the same time.
A lot of work to be done in this war on terror, but the American people can be rest assured this administration understands the task and understands the challenges and understands our obligation to protect you, to protect the American people.
The American people understand that, and that's why this uh NSA scandal is not resonating the way the left wants it to.
The public opinion polling on all of this shows that the American people very much prefer to live.
Uh when you boil it all down, the American people, we want to stay alive.
We want to be alive, and we want to continue to live in this country, and we know what happened to us on nine eleven, and uh the American people haven't forgotten it.
Even though the Democrats would love to try to make as many people as possible think it never happened or that it was just a one-time occurrence, or hell, it's the way of the world now we gotta we gotta learn to live with these kinds of things.
We can't be cowards about it.
Two different world views on display.
Let's move on to the Alito hearings.
I mentioned that the American Bar Association has come out with its best ever top drawer ruling uh on on Alitos fitness.
But he is well qualified at the highest rating that they get they ever give a judicial nominee, and this has sent the left off into a tizzy, particularly the nags, Eleanor Squeal says that her opposition to Alito is not just knee jerk, and then in this sound bite, here she goes on to spell all the knee-jerk liberal talking points that they always use.
Worse than Scalia, he'll strip away women's rights, civil rights, turn back the clock, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
This is at the National Press Club today, a press conference on the Alito nomination nomination with the nags, Eleanor Squeedle squealing here.
Many might say that the only reason you're doing this is you're knee jerk Democrats.
And you wouldn't approve of anything that Bush appointed.
And I want to make it stop, stop, stop, stop, stop, stop the tape.
During the uh during the uh hearings for Judge Roberts.
These same groups were asked if they've ever supported a Republican judicial nominee.
I don't believe we have.
So you can say whatever you want to say, Miss Smeal, but the bottom line is it is knee-jerk.
Listen to the rest of this.
That that is not the case.
We believe he will be the most reactionary judge on the court.
Further to the right of Mr. Scalia.
Stop this tape.
They say that about every nominee.
That's part of the playbook knee-jerk response.
He will be the most reactionary judge on the court further to the right of Scalia.
A person who will tip the court away from a pattern advancing the rights of women, advancing the rights of African Americans and Latinas, but most importantly, a person who doesn't understand workers' rights or discrimination.
Stop the tape.
That is I'm talking I'm sorry, folks, that is Soviet Union lingo.
Workers' rights, discrimination.
Well, we're living in 2005.
We don't have sweatshops out there.
Sorry, it is.
Union membership in this country is at an all-time low.
We live in a world that has passed these people by.
Workers' rights.
They are employees, they're associates.
But anyway, all this is a bunch of drivel.
Of course we are concerned about reproductive rights.
He will strip them away.
Please don't let this country go thus far backwards.
We can't put it back together again.
We can't bring Martha Luther King back.
Civil rights and women's rights are at stake.
Oh, okay, so she denies that this is a knee-jerk opposition, and everything she says is right out of the knee-jerk handbook.
Which the same thing they say about any nominee that any Republican president puts forth.
Same press conference, Kim Gandhi, the actual president of the NAGs, here's a portion of what she said.
His opinions are very erudite.
They're in very legal language.
He doesn't sound like Archie Bunker.
But what he does in the final analysis is say that victims of sex and race discrimination can't get their day in court.
That students who are sexually harassed in school, sexually abused, sexually assaulted, can't bring a lawsuit under the civil rights law.
He joined the uh concerned alumni of Princeton.
And the whole goal of the concerned alumni of Princeton was to keep women out of Princeton and to keep people of color out of Princeton, to keep their numbers down.
He was so proud of it.
He actually included that membership as evidence of his conservative credentials when he applied for a job with the uh with a Republican administration.
And so we know that he was willing to work to keep women and people of color out of Princeton.
All right.
We we know this, huh?
Do you think that if one shred of that were true, that he would have ever been confirmed in the first place to sit as a federal judge or an appellate judge.
This is this is it is hysteria.
These people are unhinged.
To compare him to Archie Bunker, but says he's just an Archiebunker, but he's smoother.
He's just a smooth archibunker.
Uh this is laughable, and it's panic time with these people.
And I think what the Nags are trying to do here, the nags are saying, hey, will you guys get off this NSA stuff?
And when you get off this, we we're we're talking about a Supreme Court seat here, and if we lose this, we're in deep doo-doo.
We're gonna lose control of the court to botch this country.
Because the left doesn't like the constitution of this country.
The whole point that the left wants judges on courts is to change the Constitution because they don't like it, because it doesn't fit with the way they want to live.
They don't like these kinds of limits.
They don't like these kinds of of uh of Of laws and so forth, because they want to be able to live outside them.
And so the Constitution has to be changed.
It's an old document, written by a bunch of old men.
It's not relevant anymore.
It's got to breathe.
It's got to bend, it's got to be flexible and so forth.
And what they're afraid of is people that strictly interpret the Constitution.
And that's why they're afraid of all conservatives, and they're afraid of Judge Alito.
But I'll tell you, if this guy had done half, if he had done one thing, just one thing, all these allegations.
His career would be dirt.
He wouldn't have gotten confirmed by anybody.
This would have come up long ago in his previous confirmation hearings for federal judgeships that he at present holds.
We must take a brief time out.
We'll get to your phone calls after the break here.
So sit tight.
The number again, 800 two eight two eight eight two.
We will be right back.
You know what I say, folks?
I say keep these freaks out there.
Keep these left-wing socialist freaks out there, the feminazis, the 1960s feminazes, more, mean more Chuck Schumer, more Dick Durbin.
Keep them out there front and center, making the case and telling us who these people are.
Martin Luther King.
Have to bring up Martin Luther King in this Alito bet.
With Martin Luther King for abortion on demand.
I don't recall Martin Luther King taking a position that way.
I don't think Martin Luther King was for abortion on demand.
Well, apparently he was, at least according to these people, because he's being thrown in with all these other rights they're talking about.
Was Martin Luther King for partial birth abortion?
I don't know.
Does the record uh clear on that?
So we need Martin Luther King.
People understand he was for abortion.
The conservatives are all archie bunker.
These dolts pretend to be smarter than we are.
So brilliant.
We, of course, are the Neanderthals.
What it boils down to is this.
If you oppose socialism, if you support a colorblind society, if you want to leave issues like abortion and marriage to the states and the people, you shouldn't be confirmed.
You shouldn't even be listened to.
You shouldn't even be taken seriously.
Because these are the elites, and they're smarter than all the rest of us.
And it goes back, folks, you can always tie this back to the there's a there's a foundational belief for these people.
The foundational belief is that capitalism, the system under which we've organized our affairs is unfair.
It is inherently unfair, therefore America is inherently unfair.
Capitalism picks, chooses winners and losers.
And of course, the winners get to pick other winners and then they leave the losers out, and the losers have no choice.
It's like I didn't see it, but I will bet you.
I will bet I am so confident of this, having not even seen it, I will bet you that there was a journalist somewhere yesterday and last night talking about this West Virginia story, lamenting the poor, poor circumstances of minors in West Virginia.
This country is so horrible.
This country is so derelict.
This country is so discriminating, this country's so whatever, that these poor people have no other thing to do.
They have no other opportunity.
They have no chance.
They are life's losers, as picked by the flawed system of capitalism.
And they have no choice but then to risk their lives going down into these mines where if the explosions or cave-ins don't kill them, the pollution will.
And nobody cares.
No, but it's all about energy for the rich corporations and the rich people.
It's all about exploiting these poor, dumb people, and somebody's gonna be out there speaking for them, and in the process, you impugn the miners, you impugn their families, you impugn a tradition of work that is well paid, and you impugn a country.
And that's the message.
It's the same, and it's the same template when talking about soldiers.
They don't want to do that.
They're only over there because they have no other choice.
They come from poor areas, hay seed areas of the country, they have no chance to get an education, no chance to get a job.
Bush won't even raise a minimum wage.
What choice they have?
They have to join the army to go get killed.
That's the only chance to impune them, impugn the military, impugn the country.
And it's all about impugning capitalism.
These people are socialists, they call themselves liberals, but they're socialists, and they want a great socialist order with themselves ruling the roost, of course, different rules for themselves than the uh rules they will write and set for everybody else.
Then you have the egalitarians.
And these are the people.
No matter if 95% of the country believe in something, if 5% don't, then the 5% need to dominate.
Why, what about the people who don't agree with this?
Well, what about the people who do it?
What about the people?
Well, if those people don't agree with it, then it's called a democracy.
It's called win elections and get to power and do it your way.
It's also called adaptation.
But oh no, we are ignoring these people.
We're making them feel left out.
We're leaving them behind.
This system sucks.
This is not fair.
Yet go anywhere around the world you want and find where their system has ever worked.
Find where their system of socialism has produced prosperity like this nation has, you can't find it.
You can't find a system of socialism around the world which has produced anything like the freedom we have here.
And yet, and yet for some reason that's founded in ignorance, coupled with elitism and arrogance.
They insist that their way is better, even though it's an utter failure.
It gets people killed.
It makes slaves of people.
It enslaves them and it puts the oftentimes you build walls around the country to keep them in.
And yet they still laud that system and they still pretend that that's what their objectives are.
Here is uh Joe in St. Louis.
Joe, welcome.
Nice to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
You know, Rush, with regard to Abramoff, and how the uh news media is trying to portray this as a Republican scandal.
Do you think anybody will take notice that it's a Republican administration and a Republican Justice Department that's going after this craft in corruption?
Uh no, and in fact I'm I sort of made this point in the last in the last hour comparing it.
Let's go back to 1996.
In 1996, we had an equally large scandal of major proportions, and that was the illegal contributions, campaign contributions from a foreign country and a number of foreign companies, but the big one was the SHICOMs.
And the money was going to the Clinton campaign, and it's coming in uh unmarked uh bills dropped off in money sacks at various locations by people named John Wong and Johnny Chung.
And uh we had the Buddhist monks that were exploited by Al Gore out there.
We had Pauline, well, I can't remember her name, Pauline Can Channel, like all these, and and and it was it was it was getting ready to blow up, and so Bill Clinton goes out there.
I think we got a big problem here.
We need campaign finance reform.
So he tried to set himself above it by saying he was just a victim of it too.
He didn't know this is going on, you need campaign finance reform.
The media went, oh yes, we need more government control, more government reform.
Yes, he is such a great president.
Oh, we love this man, why not us?
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
In the meantime, all of the principals flee the country before they can be subpoenaed to testify.
They still haven't been rounded up, and nothing was ever really done on it because, and this is to get to your point now, uh, Joe, because in the Justice Department at that time was Janet Reno, whose main job was to shield the Clinton administration from all of these scandals.
And that's the difference.
The Bush Justice Department is getting to the bottom of this, and whoever is tainted by it is gonna be tainted by it.
And if you look at who Snerdl, I just went in and look at Snerdley's computer during uh the break at the last top of the hour, and and this Abramov, he was spreading money all over the place, folks.
The fact that this is a conservative scandal, Republican scandal is another media myth.
You're gonna see people like Carl Levin affected by it, Harry Reed from Nevada, Debbie Stabenow of Michigan's involved in this, helmet head Byron Dorgan from one of the Dakotas is involved.
A lot of them are.
Now he's he's spread money around all over the place.
Now that in and of itself is not a crime.
You've got to find the quid pro quo.
You've got to be able to show that there was bribery.
They've got to show that there was some kind of a trade-off.
And this is where Abramov, and Abramov is not going to be able to get away with just saying something.
There's going to have to be proof of what he says.
He's he's gonna he's gonna vomit.
He's he's gonna get into verbal diarrhea here because he wants to limit his exposure in jail and he wants to go to a nice jail.
So he's gonna sing, and he's I don't think he's gonna hold back.
Uh and if you look at the number of people that got Abramov's money in the Indian tribes, and I'll tell you, that's another thing.
A lot of his clients, most of his clients are Indian tribes, find the states where the Indian tribes uh uh have uh uh uh a lot of activity going on, and you're gonna find those states and representatives from those states uh uh probably entwined in this.
But until such time as it actually happens, it'd be silly to speculate on it.
But already the media's got this made.
It's a Republican scan.
Let's listen to a little uh montage here.
We've got Lou Dobbs, Joe Scarborough, David Schuster, Richard Ben Vanista, Craig Crawford, Dan Abrams, Stanley Brand, Lisa Myers.
This is uh uh from last night and this morning.
Media breathlessly reporting the Abramov scandal is the biggest since whenever.
Uh just listen.
What could end up being the biggest corruption scandal in Washington in decades?
It's gonna be the biggest congressional scandal since ABSCAM.
Biggest scandal since Watergate.
The biggest scandal to come down the pike in a long, long time.
This is the biggest Washington corruption scandal in a generation.
The congressional corruption scandal could become the biggest in decades.
This is clearly the biggest scandal of the last 40 years.
This could be the biggest scandal to hit Congress in decades.
Okay, so the template has been could be, could be, could be, could be, could be, might be, could be the biggest scandal yet.
Um and of course, Bill Schneider at CNN broke out the champagne.
It's 1994 all over again.
On January 3rd, 2006, Bill Schneider on CNN called the winner in the congressional elections.
This is cut seven, Mike.
Let's go with that.
Jack Abramov's gonna sing.
But who's gonna face the music?
Almost half the public believes most members of Congress are corrupt, about the same as in the fall of 1994, which saw a huge revolt against incumbents.
Most of Abramov's money seems to have gone to his fellow Republicans.
Even if voters turn against all incumbents, Republicans have more at stake.
Most incumbents in Congress are Republicans.
When asked in October which party in Congress would do a better job dealing with corruption, Democrats held an 11-point advantage.
Not because people believe Democrats are less corrupt, but because people know Democrats are out of power.
And money follows power.
In 1994, Democrats had been in power for 40 years.
When voters got disgusted with Congress, they threw out the Democratic majority.
Well, Democrats say it's a Republican Congress now.
And so the uh the Congressional elections of 2006 were called yesterday by Bill Schneider on CNN in his first grade uh uh sing song speech approach to the viewers at uh at CNN.
I know he needs to put on a cheerleader outfit, exactly right.
And of course, cheerleading is dangerous these days.
You know, this saw a story the other day about all the injuries that are happening to cheerleaders.
Bill better be careful.
A lot of them are falling on their heads.
And uh so it it's it all of this is supposition.
Now the voters know, the voters know the American people think.
It's not that they don't think Democrats are corrupt, it's they know that money follows power.
They think they're all power.
By the way, folks, I have to tell you something.
Mr. Schneider, if you're talking about the American public that watches the mainstream press, they're gonna think Democrats do run the show.
I would bet you that most Americans who watch a little news every day.
Think Harry Reed runs the Senate, think Nancy Polloney Pelosi runs the House, and that all these others like Durbin and Schumer are powerful leaders of the Senate.
You don't see Republicans on television interviewed by the media as the leaders of anything.
You see them on TV cowering in the corners after listening to whatever dingy Harry is accused them of.
But you don't see him acting like power leaders, do you?
So I I I'd be I'd be very careful here as to who the American public thinks are the leaders of that institution going into all this.
But we just don't know.
The guy gave a lot of money to a lot of people.
And it does have the ability to shape the elections of 06 more than anything else.
But I have to tell you too, I, you know, I just it's like I was playing golf on no, when was it?
It was Sunday, playing golf on Sunday, and two guys that was playing with.
Do you think USC stands a chance?
Or Texas stands a chance against USC.
Well, of course.
They're only gonna be on the field, the game starts zero zero.
Of course, Texas has a chance.
Well, you know, the media the media's already proclaiming USC the four time champion, third time, whatever they are, national champion.
It's The game's over.
It's just a formality.
And I said, let me tell you something about sports media.
They're no different than anybody else.
They report the news that they want to be.
The game hadn't even happened yet.
It's silly to talk about who's winning it.
It hadn't started.
Of course, most of the media, USC got it in the bag.
Texas may as well not even show up.
So I said, based on that thing at Texas going to win.
You know, whatever the media says in mass, I go the other way.
So this Abramov scandal may not even turn out to be that big.
Because they've all made it sound like it's going to be the biggest thing in 40 years, 40 years, 30 years.
Watergate.
NSA, Abramov, Watergate, folks, they're salivating out there.
And when they start salivating and choosing the result they want, they end up not seeing the reality as it passes them by.
And I'm just, it's too too soon to assume because nobody knows where this is going to end up and who it's going to affect.
Gotta take a timeout.
Be back with more in just a second.
Stay with us.
I'm not sure, but I think Bill Schneider has been predicting the demise of the Republican Congress since about 1995.
I mean, a couple days after they were uh sworn in.
He's been predicting their demise.
Somebody over there ought to check his record on these kind of predictions.
There's something else about this Schneider's report.
The whole reason, sole reason that the Democrats lost control of the House in 94 was due to scandal.
Let them think that.
I I, you know, I'm I'm I'm I'm almost thinking, don't say any more, Rush.
Let them go on and live these lies.
Let them believe these stories that they make up and tell themselves.
The simple fact of the matter is the Democrats lost the House in 1994 for a myriad of reasons, but top the list was issues and ideas.
They had none.
Republicans offered the contract with America.
There was also a brilliant strategery that was enacted that year by Newt Gingrich and the boys, and that was to nationalize House elections.
They went out to all these House seats, all these elections in districts in the states, and they turned them into nationally oriented elections.
They were charging what some Democrat would do, not for the district, but what he was going to do in foreign policy and other national issues.
And a Democrats don't win big on that stuff.
They win big on pork and bring into bacon home and this sort of stuff, but they lost big and it was it was not just scandal.
The Democrats don't know any other way.
Ever since Watergate, they think the only way they can win is scandal.
Uh or have a scandalous candidate themselves who wins, like Clinton.
But other than that, I mean, they haven't received 50% of the popular vote in a presidential race since 1976.
They have not.
This idea that they represent the mainstream, the vast majority of the American people's bunk.
And this idea that '94 was lost because of scandal.
It makes sense they think that, because what's their total approach to winning in 06 and 08?
Scandal.
The climate of corruption that the Republicans have created in uh in Washington.
And as such, we get no ideas from them.
We don't know what the Democrats stand for.
They don't even tell us themselves.
They have to go into closed door meetings for two hours to figure out what they believe.
Of course, it's not really what they're doing.
They're going behind closed doors to figure out where they can say what they don't believe to cover up what they really believe, because if they told us what they really believed and wanted to do, they would be doomed.
So shell game continues, but I'm just gonna tell you a bunch of people that avoid reality.
I don't care if they're in politics or in any other walk of life.
If you go through life avoiding reality and living a dream, living, living a fantasy, at some point you are gonna get slapped upside the head, and the reality that's gonna descend upon you will crush you.
Because you've been ignoring it all these, and you know personally, people who do this, and you know when it hits them, and you know how bad the Democrats are cruising for this, and I'm gonna be around to chronicle it.
Be back here in just a second.
Stay and a question.
What if I had been the one to report that the miners were all alive yesterday on this program?
Back in just a second.
Okay, gotta take a brief time out here at the top of the hour.
A woman has married a dolphin, ladies and gentlemen, and I can't say that I am the least bit surprised by that.
▲
Export Selection