All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 6, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:27
January 6, 2006, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Yeah, go ahead and turn the ditto cam on.
Let people see me in my misery here.
Go ahead and turn on.
What do I?
Yeah, absolutely.
We'll open everything up here because I don't feel bad enough to stay in bed, but I just guilt.
And the real answer is guilt.
I was already out last week.
You wouldn't believe the grief I get when I take one day off.
The email grief.
A country's going to die.
We're going to lose the country.
Do you ever work anymore?
You're going to email me when I take this the day of it.
Greetings, folks.
It's Friday.
Let's make the best of it here.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
I've thought about that.
I've thought about being the Johnny Carson Radio three-day week.
I've thought about it.
I understand why he did it now.
And he did it when he was only 12 years into it.
And he only had to do an hour and a half a night, and he had 12 writers.
Anyway, greetings, my friends, and welcome.
It's another sterling edition of the Rush Limbaugh program.
Straight ahead, we are ditto camming.
All three hours will be up and running.
For those of you who subscribe at rushlimbaugh.com, Open Line Friday means you get to choose what we talk about when we go to phone calls.
As you know, Monday through Thursday, it's all about what interests me because I refuse to talk about things I don't care about unless I'm in an expansive mood.
But on Friday, whatever you want to talk about when you call, that's fine.
Pretty much, I mean, some rules apply.
It can't be boring.
You can't be dull.
You're not going to talk.
We don't talk about psychics or the phone bill or the electric bill and how costs are rising.
If you want to do that, call your local Nimrod host.
Phone number again, 800-282-2882.
The email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
Well, well, well.
It seems that the Guardian and the Times of London, I'm sorry, Times of India, India Times, whatever, are publishing excerpts of James Rison's book, you know, the New York Times Ace reporter who's out of the box with how the president's violating everybody's constitutional rights by stealing and by warrantless searches and by monitoring what everybody's doing.
Speaking of which, did you see the story where this out-of-control Attorney General in New York, Elliot Spitzer, is detecting all these abuses in nursing homes with hidden cameras?
Where are the warrants for those searches?
I'm going to get into this in due course because everybody's under a lot of misconceptions about the Fourth Amendment, what it states.
And Andy McCarthy has a great piece today at National Review Online on who the hell are these judges on the FISA court to be talking about cases.
Judges don't do this.
They don't leak.
They don't talk, especially about cases that haven't come before them.
He's fit to be tight about it.
He's right.
This Ryzen book, the excerpts in the Ryzen book, what's the name of this book, idiot book?
State of War is the name of the book.
This is a guy that wrote the New York Times piece December 16th, got all his hullabaloo going.
And here's the story.
And the story misses about 30% of the import of this, I think.
The CIA, using a double agent, Russian scientist, may have handed a blueprint for a nuclear bomb to Iran, according to a new book which has ruffled the U.S. National Security Establishment, State of War, by James Risen,
the New York Times reporter who exposed, I'm New York Times advocate and arbiter who exposed the Bush administration's controversial domestic spying operation, claims that the plans contained fatal flaws designed to derail Tehran's nuclear drive.
But the deliberate errors were so rudimentary that they would have been easily fixed by sophisticated Russian nuclear scientists, the book said.
The operation which took place during the Clinton administration in early 2000 was codenamed Operation Merlin and may have been one of the most reckless operations in the modern history of the CIA, according to Ryzen.
Now, when you read that, oh, wow, you focus on Clinton and you focus on the fact that the CIA was trying, and this is, by the way, from what I understand, pretty common.
If you know people are onto something and they need to steal technology or they need to get it through counter-espionage and you know they're trying to get it, give it to them.
Just give them a bunch of garbage and give a bunch of garbage that won't work once they put it together.
Now, Ryzen thinks that the important thing about this is that the CIA bought something real badly and that the CIA didn't take into account that the Russians would be able to notice the errors in the leaked instructions.
Talking about a firing set here, what they did, they called for the unnamed sign.
The plan called for an unnamed scientist, a defector from the Soviet nuclear program, to offer Iran the blueprint for a firing set, which is the mechanism which triggers the chain reaction needed for a nuclear explosion.
Now, according to Ryzen's book, the agent, posing as a greedy Russian scientist, keen to steal records, delivered the plans as instructed by the CIA to Iran's mission to the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna.
He had been told by the CIA that the Iranians already had the technology detailed in the plans and that the ruse was simply an attempt by the CIA to find out the full scope of Tehran's nuclear knowledge.
But contrary to orders not to open the packet, the double agent added a note which made it clear he could help fix the flaws for money.
The CIA declined to comment in detail on the book's claims on Iran, but issued a vigorous condemnation of Risen's work and methods.
Jennifer Millerweis, CIA Director of Public Affairs, said, readers deserve to know that every chapter of State of War contains serious inaccuracies.
The author's reliance on anonymous sources begs the reader to trust that these are knowledgeable people.
And this book demonstrates anonymous sources are often unreliable.
All right.
Now, this happened in 2000.
This is six years ago.
Okay, so if the CIA, this is the first thing that jumped out at me.
If the CIA has put together this secret plan called code name Operation Merlin, and its purpose was to foul up the Iranians' attempt to successfully build firing sets that triggers the nuclear explosion, the chain reaction needed for a nuclear explosion.
What's the first thing you conclude from that?
They were working on a nuclear bomb as far back as 2000.
The Iranians are working on a nuclear bomb as far back as 2000.
Because if they weren't, if they weren't working on a nuclear bomb, then why would you need this operation?
Why would you need Operation Merlin?
The second thing that sort of stands out at me is, if you read more of the story in the excerpt, you find out the Russians were the ones helping the Iranians.
So you have to know that this plan was kind of screwy because you have to figure that the Russians are going to figure out they've got a bad set of instructions here, whether you got this bogus agent or not.
The whole plan seems kind of, it just doesn't seem to be all that well thought out.
This plan seemed easy.
Now, another question, easy to figure out on the part of the Iranians and the Russians, the Russians are helping the Iranians.
Forget the double agent here.
That's not even important.
You had a greedy double agent who offered to sell to the Iranians the corrections to the mistakes the CIA was trying to get him to feed to the Iranians.
But you don't even need that because the Iranians don't because they're working with the Russians already.
And the double agent is a recalcitrant, fed up, teed off Russian nuclear scientist.
So they're already working with people who can spot the error.
That's the incompetence.
Whoever put this program together at the CIA didn't stop thinking about it.
Now, there's a third question.
There's a third question, and that is, was this a rogue operation or did Clinton know about it?
And the reason I ask that question is this.
If they had taken this to Clinton, would Clinton have authorized it?
I don't get the impression Clinton cared a whit about this kind of stuff.
He didn't want to tackle big issues.
He hadn't tackled terrorism.
He hadn't tackled anything that was big.
He didn't want to upset his approval numbers.
These are things that we don't know, but I'm guessing here that the CIA, they learned six years ago Iran's working on a nuclear, but that's the big deal out of this.
So if you want to take the big news out of this, it's that.
Iran's been working on this for a long time.
Now, some people don't believe that to this day.
And the reason that's important, you've got that hack AlBaradi at the UN running around saying they're only months away.
You have the European Union negotiating and trying to use diplomacy to get this insane lunatic that runs Iran to give up the program or to stall it.
He's saying, hell no, we're going to go ahead with this plan.
Who do you think we want to become part of the nuclear club?
And we're getting close and close and close.
Now, in the current climate, with the CIA having botched weapons of mass destruction along with everybody else's intelligence pre-war, we're still not sure that they botched it.
We know that Saddam had it, but let's take the current template, the conventional wisdom.
The conventional wisdom is the CIA blew it on weapons of mass destruction.
They blew it on pre-war intel.
Everything they knew was wrong.
They didn't get anything right.
They haven't been able to do a decent job of anything in the last 25 years, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Okay, now, here's AlBaradai out there saying, well, we're six, seven months away from the Iranians having a nuclear weapon.
Story yesterday, Iran's already figure out how to separate uranium from the ore and get yellow cake.
And that means they don't have to, Joe Wilson and Niger to try to buy some.
I mean, it's already taken care of.
If the CIA comes out and says all that stuff now, is anybody going to believe them?
If the Bush administration came out and said, we've got a big problem in Iran, this close to a nuclear weapon, we've got to do something about it.
You know what the cat calls in this country would be from the American left or from the Democratic Party?
There goes Bush again, lying to get the American people all gymned up in fear so we can get another war going in Iran so we can go beat up some more Muslims and so forth.
Nobody would believe it.
That's what the important part of this story to me is Ryzen, and Ryzen doesn't even, this is something he doesn't even get.
This guy is not even smart enough to know what he's learned in his own reporting.
This guy doesn't figure it out.
He's off on some tangent about how the CIA blew their program.
The fact is, this is a tantamount admission or evidence that Iran has been working on a nuclear plan at least for six years.
So I don't think that's insignificant in the context of the Middle East or in the context of the world.
I got to take a quick time out here, folks, but sit tight and be patient.
We will be back and roll right on right after this.
I have, in the break, I've been pointed to a column on this very subject that I opened the program with by Michael Ledean at National Review Online.
He was friends with James Jesus Angleton.
James Jesus Angleton is the greatest counterintelligence agent Langley has ever had.
Bill Buckley's written a book about him.
And as Ladine writes his piece, he gets out the Ouija board and contacts Angleton up in heaven to get the input of what's going on.
And I missed something in this.
When I speculated Clinton, the CIMN had done this because Clinton didn't know that apparently, let me just read it to you from Ladine's column.
No, they did make the case.
Well, one more thing.
Well, maybe the CIA had a political problem.
They certainly knew that Clinton wasn't going to do anything about it, so why should they make the case?
Just go ahead and implement the program.
And Angleton, no, they did make the case.
That's Ryzen's real scoop, and he doesn't even know it.
They had to make the case to Clinton in order to justify the operation.
You couldn't have Merlin unless you knew there was an Iranian nuclear weapons program.
Remember that Ryzen makes a big deal about the fact that the Russian defector was carrying a technical design for a firing set for a Russian-designed nuclear weapon.
And now, Operation Merlin was to use a double agent to give a false set of instructions on assembling the firing set.
We give the false instructions, but the Russian, the point is that the program was silly because the Russians were working with the Iranians and could spot the error and could spot the subterfuge and could spot our effort.
So what we were trying to do in a clandestine way was not clandestine at all.
It was spotted immediately.
And the end result is, is that the Iranians were able to put together the firing set necessary to trigger the reaction to cause a nuclear explosion.
And you might say, okay, so Clinton ends up giving the Iranians the bomb.
That may be a bit of a stretch, but it certainly is worth considering.
But still to me, the really fascinating thing about this is that the Clinton administration knew, and now I'm convinced, had to sign off on the CIA operation to try to sting the Iranians into building a device that didn't work.
So they knew that they were building nuclear weapons or had their eyes didn't do, I mean, and the way they went about it was absolutely foolhardy.
It was destined to be found out.
The plan was idiotic.
It had no chance of success.
And in the process, the Iranians figured out the correct set, firing set instructions, and it moved them even closer to the day that we're now even closer to, now that we were back in the year 2000.
So I wanted to pass this on because I haven't seen excerpts of Ryzen's book, at least these two stories anywhere, but in The Guardian and in The Times of India, folks.
So great mainstream organizations they are.
And I wanted to pass this on to if anybody in the next two or three months, four or five months or whatever, somebody says, you know, we got a problem in Iran.
They're developing nukes.
And you're going to hear a chorus of cat calls from the left and Democrats in this country.
More Bush lies, more Washington lies.
Bush trying to change the subject.
Bush trying to get the bad news of whatever they're going to try to call bad news off the front pages and get people focused on nukes again.
They'll say, remember, Bush lied and Cheney lied about Saddam and nukes.
So when that happens, and it's going to happen, you just remember that we've got evidence now from the Clinton administration and a CIA program that the Iranians have been working on a nuclear weapon for at least six years, if not more.
We've also got some funny shenanigans going on with the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Senate Democrats are considering, as a story came out yesterday, Senate Democrats considering a plan that could delay a committee vote on Sam Alito's Supreme Court nomination for at least a week.
This is being called a soft filibuster.
And it's nothing, they know they can't defeat Alito.
The purpose here is to try to gin up more negative stories.
They can't defeat him on the merits.
And so it's a time-honored technique Dingy Harry has used several times.
The point here is to slow down what would otherwise have been a quick confirmation for President Bush's pick to replace Sandra Day O'Connor.
The Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter had hoped to hold a committee vote on Alito's nomination January 17th.
It's a little over a week from Monday's start of the federal appellate judges' confirmation hearing.
Now, I guess Arlen could always move the date up, but no, no, no, no, can't do that.
We have to have comedy with the Democrats on the committee.
They want to delay it for a week.
I had to laugh.
Yesterday, we hear all these people on C-SPAN talking about Jack Abramoff and the lobbying scene.
Oh, the Democrats don't have any power.
The American people are going to understand it.
Yeah, Abramoff might have given damn money to the Democrats.
But the American people are going to realize Abramoff didn't have any power.
Yeah, the Democrats don't have any power.
They can't slow down the confirmation hearings of Sam Alito.
They can't affect him at all.
They have so little power, they can't do anything.
We should have had these hearings last fall.
Yeah, they don't have any power.
Senate Leadership Aid said Thursday that Senate Minority Leader Dingy Harry told Majority Leader Bill Frist Democrats will invoke their right to hold the Alito committee vote over for one week.
The aid spoke on condition of anonymity because the move had not been announced yet.
Well, that didn't sit well with Dingy Harry.
If it already isn't taking place, there's a conference call scheduled today among Senate Democrats to discuss their Alito hearing strategiery.
Senate majority leader or minority leader Dingy Harry said to me by aides livid that staff went public yesterday with his party's plans for a one-week delay.
Now, that conference call was supposed to take place this morning, and it might have already taken place.
And if it has, it won't be long before the results or the contents of that meeting start being leaked.
The one-week delay is one of several strategeries that Dingy Harry is considering deploying.
Talking to Howard Dean and outside Democrat activists, they wanted to fight.
Dingy Harry's listening to the people that want to fight.
Apparently, they've raised more than $15 million to fight Supreme Court nominations, and they were ready to spend it over the next month.
But if Dingy Harry didn't delay the hearings, they wouldn't be able to spend the money.
And they want the fight.
They want to take, well, bring it on.
We'll be glad to debate whatever they want to debate with Alito.
We'll be glad to watch their commercials and their lying stinking whatever.
In fact, I got an audio of one I can share with you in a minute.
Oh, man, a legend, a way of life.
Well, it's NFL Wildcard Weekend this weekend.
It's otherwise known as Waste Week in the NFL.
And I'll tell you why it's called Waste Week.
They added this week, they added the wildcard teams to get to 12 teams total in the playoffs, six from each conference, just for money.
Get more rights revenue from the broadcast networks for playoff games.
The fact that no wildcard, well, one wildcard team has gone on to the Super Bowl and won it.
This is Waste Week.
You're weeding out people that don't deserve to be there in the first place here in the wildcard round.
And you get the real rounds of playoffs beginning next week.
It's called Waste Week, but it's still football.
It's NFL football, and anything can happen.
So I still love it.
Well, you know, I think you got to pick, because there's only four games this weekend, well, the waste teams, according to standards, you have to take the sixth seeds.
So you got the Steelers and the Jaguars, not the Steelers and Steelers and Jaguars to be the waste team in the AFC.
The NFC be the Redskins.
And I'm having a metal block.
They play Tampa Bay and Carolina.
But in the NFC, everything's a waste team except Seattle.
So it sort of doesn't apply.
AFC is where the talent is this season.
Anyway, anyway, we've got some phone calls to go to, but I want to give you three audio sunbites here on this Alito business because Dingi Harry, all upset now that his carefully crafted plans have been leaked by his own staff or Judiciary Committee staff before they were officially.
Dingy Harry wanted to be the one to go out there and get all the glory.
And it was leaked by anonymous staffers before it was ready to be announced.
So one of the reasons is that Howard Dean and MoveOn.org and all these kook crackpot outfits on the left have told Dingy Harry, don't give up on this guy like you gave up on Roberts.
We're bankrolling you.
We are your prime contributors and we want an action fight on this.
So Dingy, okay, okay, we'll delay it for a week and you can run your ads and so forth, knowing full well it isn't going to matter.
In fact, it's going to hurt because it's going to make these people even more obvious kooks.
And it's going to give the opportunity for blabber mouths, people with utter diarrhea of the mouth like Chuck Schumer, more opportunity to poop verbally all over us, such as this.
If Judge Alito stonewalls at the hearings, he could very well jeopardize his nomination.
Ooh, I'm scared.
His obligation to answer questions on these issues is certainly greater than John Roberts because he's spoken out more on these issues.
Wait a minute.
Stop.
Stop this.
Stop, stop, stop.
Wait, whoa, whoa, whoa.
This is why I say that the offering, the oral utterances of Senator Schumer are verbal poop.
Diarrhea.
Wasn't it Chuck Schumer and his gang that said Roberts because he hadn't written so much?
Because there wasn't much of a paper trail, because he'd only been in the appellate circuit appellate court for a year or two.
Well, he had a bombs.
And we're not going to sit there and say no for an answer.
He's got to really let fly.
He's got to answer these questions.
He's got to be thorough.
He's got to answer these questions more thoroughly than any nominee ever has because of his lack of a record.
Now, here comes Alito with a lifetime of a record and the same guy, Chuck Schumer, say, he's got to answer more thoroughly than any previous nominee precisely because he's got such a big record.
Why, it's rote.
These guys are reading from a script.
They will say whatever they say regardless of the circumstance.
Here's the rest of the verbal poop from Senator Schumer.
Be able to use as a mantra the excuse that the issue might come before him on the court.
These issues have already come before him.
He has a record on them.
He'll be able to dance rings around these guys.
You know, in fact, Hollywood, you need to make more gay movies.
I go dances with men, Alito dancing around the Democrats on the judiciary.
Can you throw Feinstein out of there?
Dances with men.
Not dances with Wolf Dance.
He's he's got.
I'm just talking about, I'm just talking about, I'm not talking about manliness, Mr. Sterling.
He's talking about gender.
Dances with men.
Alito running rings around these guys.
Here's one more from Chucky.
This is from his, what is this, a press conference he gave you?
Yeah.
Does he believe in any checks in presidential power?
Oh, come.
Does he believe that warrantless wiretapping of Americans is constitutional?
And if so, when?
Does he believe the FTC should not exist?
We deserve straight and direct answers at our hearings.
And these issues, I might add, have never been more important in light of recent revelations about administrative actions in regard to warrantless wiretapping.
It has nothing to do with it.
He's got literally nothing to do with it, and he's on the FISA.
He's not on the FISA court.
I'll get to the Andy McCarthy piece on that here in just a second.
But why don't you just ask, Senator Schumer, look at, just cut to the chase here.
It's real simple.
Judge Alito, are you a socialist or do you believe in freedom?
Because you believe in freedom, you're not wanted by us on the Supreme Court.
Do you believe in socialism and big government?
Do you believe that socialism should treat everybody as an incompetent fool and do the best to help everybody, even if the sum total of the help is not much?
We're interested in the motives that you carry into the job.
Do you care about people enough or you believe in freedom?
Because if you believe in freedom, if you believe in the Constitution, we Democrats have no use for you.
Just say it, Senator Schumer.
Just say it.
Don't give us all this ring-around rosy verbal poop.
Just say what you mean.
And if Senator Schumer wants to come up and say, well, he's out of the big, wide mainstream, why don't you define the mainstream force in a partial birth abortion, full-term abortion, all-the-way abortion, half-abortion, abortion, anytime, anywhere?
That's mainstream.
You guys haven't gotten more than 50%.
You haven't even got 250% of the popular vote Democrat Party in a presidential race since 1976.
You have no claim, sir, on the great, what does he call it?
The great, great, I'm having a metal block here because I'm sick.
I just use the phrase.
I can't think of the phrase.
Mainstream.
Say these guys are part of the great mainstream is one of the biggest hoax.
Here's the moveon.org ad, same old playbook, anti-elito ad.
He's against abortion, wants to keep blacks out of college, and he's a liar.
Here's the setting.
The video is a guy that looks like Alito who's sitting in a makeup chair.
The chair says Alito on it.
He's getting his makeup done while a woman is prepping him on his answers for the hearings, telling him what to say.
Here's the audio.
Looking good.
Now let's tackle a few problem areas.
Yes, you wrote on a job application that a woman has no constitutional right to an abortion, but your excuse is brilliant.
You only did it to get the job.
You broke your promise not to rule on cases involving that company you invested with.
Stick to your answer, computer glitch.
Oh, the group you belonged to that wanted to restrict African-American admissions to your college.
You've been saying I don't recall.
Love it.
Samuel Alito's no moderate, but he plays one on TV.
Moveon.org political action is responsible for the content of this advertisement.
Good.
I'm glad that, you know, keep running these things because these are the same ads that they've been running against Republican judicial nominees from all of my adult life.
Never changes.
It's sort of like, you know why the Democrats now can't bank on a majority of the seasoned citizen vote?
Because for 30 years, they've been telling seasoned citizens that if Republicans get elected, they're either going to be kicked out of their homes or their checks are going to be cut or Social Security is going to be taken away from them or what have they.
They're going to be the OWL Point and what have you.
And none of it's ever happened.
After 30 years, people, wait a minute, all of these catastrophes are right around the corner, but they never happen.
So nobody believes this stuff anymore.
And Alito, if you're going to make charges about somebody like this, there better be something out there of the guy saying or doing something that would lend some credence.
But there's no connectivity.
They make these charges about Alito, but there's no, there's the American people have seen no evidence of any such thing.
And these people no longer have the credibility to just make these charges and get them stick.
Let me go back.
What happened to the guy?
Whoa!
What happened to the guy?
I had a guy.
Okay, what was the guy's comment?
We had a call up there.
He hung up.
It was about the CIA in Iran.
What was the guy's question?
Yeah, yeah.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Okay.
Question he was going to ask, why would the Iranians come to us wanting technology to build firing sets for nuclear weapons?
They weren't.
That's the point of Operation Merlin was to get a Russian.
They were already working with the Russians to get a double agent, somebody that was serving two masters, us and them.
And the idea was to get this Russian not from the CIA, not from the United States.
There was to be no tie to the CIA.
It was to be no tie to the United States in this deal.
The Iranians were supposed to think that a Russian was coming forth with the answers on how to build firing sets because he had access to the American secrets.
We were not supposed to have been discovered.
That's why this was such a botched plan.
It was discovered because we made a deal with a double agent who then, after getting the full set of firing instructions from our CIA, went to the targets.
The Iranians said, guess what I got?
And guess who gave it to me?
And I'll give it to you as they gave it to me if you'll pay me.
And what was idiotic about it was, why go get a Russian agent when the Iranians are already working with Russia and the Russians would know that they've got a renegade agent that the Iranians are dealing with via the CIA.
That's why the whole thing was botched.
We were not trying to help the Iranians.
We were trying to give them bad info so that when they put together the firing set and tried to fire their first nuke and just get a few sparks and then nothing fizzle out.
We're trying to set them back.
We instead, it's hard to admit this for me, folks.
I so believe in my country.
We sped up their process toward building successful firing sets.
But we weren't working with Iran.
We were trying to screw them.
Typical Clinton administration operation.
What can you say?
Oh, yeah.
Lou Rawls passed away today.
Brain cancer.
This guy was what?
Lung cancer.
Sorry, that was breaking.
Died of lung cancer.
He's so great.
This guy was so great.
He had an album once called A Hawk about the cold wind in Chicago.
What a song that was.
I listened to that stuff back when I was 16, 17, playing it on the radio back then.
What a voice.
What a voice.
He's a great, great singer.
So, so great.
Just like Otis Redding.
That guy was so unappreciated other than by those who listen to the music.
Welcome back, folks.
Open Line Friday.
El Rushbo here on the EIB Network and in Milford, Connecticut.
You're next.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Rush.
Yeah.
I got to vent a little bit.
This Chuck Schumer guy is really ticking me off.
Years now he's been in the Senate.
I'm going to watch him on these Sunday shows, folding his hands, talking arrogantly down to me.
And I start wondering to myself, where did this guy come from?
What gives him the credits to be able to be in the position that he's in?
So, you know, I start looking up and I'm looking at his bio.
You know, really doesn't look like much to me.
Like most senators, I suppose you can make that argument.
And I'm thinking, was this guy a Jan or something before he got here?
No, it's not that at all.
No, no, no.
He's a senator on the Judiciary Committee and he's a liberal.
And so he's a magnet for the camera.
He's one of these Democrats.
There are a couple people in the Democratic Party.
If there's a camera between you and Schumer, get out of the way because you're going to get run over by Schumer on his way to find the camera.
But it's like Bush right now, Bush is delivering a speech on the economy.
And I've seen a couple stories, Associated Press stories, Bush to tout economy today.
You cannot find, and let me see if I can find it real quick.
I put it near the top of the stack.
It is a story that does not once mention any good economic statistic.
It doesn't talk about unemployment now being below 5%.
It doesn't talk about all the jobs being created.
It just says Bush is going to go out and tout the economy as though it may not be true, but Bush is going to go say it.
Well, if this were the economy of the 90s and where Clinton were president, Clinton wouldn't have to go out there because Bill Schneider and everybody else in cable news would be doing seminars all day long on how great the economy is and how it was all due to Bill Clinton and his great policies.
So the House Republicans had a little meeting to tout their achievements, to tout the deficit reduction bill they passed, to tout the economy.
And of course, they have to do this.
It's a shame that they have to do this to get the message out, but that's the only way it can get out because the media is not going to report it.
You have your reaction to Schumer.
I have your reaction to something else.
We have a list today, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, whoever put out the list of witnesses.
They're going to call to question, well, not question, but to testify against Alito.
I said, why do we care who these people are?
Why is this a news story?
We haven't gotten a list from the Republicans on who they're going to call in support of Alito.
And maybe they've put it out.
It just hasn't been covered.
Democratic members of Senate Judiciary Committee announce witness list for hearings on Supreme Court nominees.
Who cares?
Who cares?
Whatever the Democrats do, it's earth-shattering news.
It's breaking news.
Don't forget, folks, the templates, what do the Democrats have to do to get back in power?
And that's been the template since 2001.
Judge Hirchner, Herchner, from the Clarence, no, she's not in the list, but guess who is?
There's some guy on this list named Stephen Dujak.
Would you like to hear about Stephen Dujak?
Let me tell you about Stephen Dujak.
He's on the list for like the third or fourth day of witnesses.
Senate Democrats have announced their witness list, Stephen Dujak.
The press release naming him as a witness describes him as an editor of an environmental magazine in Washington and a freelance writer, but it doesn't say that he's editor of the Environmental Forum magazine of the D.C.-based Environmental Law Institute.
He's also the author of these lines, which appeared in the Los Angeles Times, April 21, 2003.
Quote, like the victims of the Holocaust, animals are rounded up, trucked hundreds of miles to the kill floor, and slaughtered.
Comparisons to the Holocaust are not only appropriate, but inescapable, because whether we wish to admit it or not, cows, chickens, pigs, and turkeys are as capable of feeling loneliness, fear, pain, joy, and affection as we are.
To those who defend this modern-day Holocaust on animals by saying that animals are slaughtered for food and give us sustenance, I ask, if the victims of the Holocaust had been eaten, would that have justified the abuse and murder?
Did the fact that lampshades, soaps, and other useful products were made from their bodies excuse the Holocaust?
No, pain is pain.
This is one of the Democrats' star witnesses who are going to come up and tell a buddy why Sam Alito is not qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.
This lunatic, this kook who wants to compare the slaughter of animals to the Holocaust, he defends his idea by pointing to its origins in the thinkings of his grandfather, who was the Nobel laureate Isaac Basheva Singer.
In a short story of his called A Letter Writer, the main character writes about his pet mouse.
I mean, I don't have time to, well, yeah, he writes about his pet mouse.
Pet mouse is smarter than all the people in the house where the mouse lives in.
Nuts.
I have to believe that every witness on this list has been vetted, has been called for a reason.
So I'm wondering, are they going to hit Alito on some aspect of the Holocaust and ask him what he thinks about the wanton slaughter of animals?
I can't bring it on, folks.
Why should we fear these literal lunatics?
They'll be back in just a second.
What, you want me to say that?
Well, I mean, with modifications.
Maybe in the next hour, we will be back here, folks.
First hour, Open Line Fridays in the can.
▲
Export Selection