All Episodes
Previous Next
Jan. 11, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:22
January 11, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
I have just come into the uh possession of some very interesting documents, uh, ladies and gentlemen, to go directly to Senator Kennedy's desire to subpoena the Library of Congress for these cap records.
To find out exactly just what kind of a racist pig Samolito is.
A racist sexist pig.
That's what Senator Kennedy thinks that a subpoena will produce.
Greetings, my friends, and welcome back.
We're here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network and the Rush Limbaugh program.
Ditto camming today, all three hours.
For those of you who are uh members, the enlightened ones at Rush 24-7, telephone number 800 282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
I just want to set this up.
This this CAP organization was uh was a fringe group at Princeton that they're trying to portray as as big and and large and an elito with big prominent member.
And this uh organization didn't want women in the school, they want blacks in the school, they didn't want minorities in the school, they don't want the disadvantaged in the school, and they didn't want uh they didn't want the handicapped in the school, they don't want anybody in a school but rich white guys.
Like the club that Ted Kennedy was a member of at Harvard, for example.
And it's just more of the same.
It's it's more old, tired, worn-out stuff from their 30-year-old playbook.
I hate to keep using the phrase, but it's the best way to characterize this.
They think that every conservative nominee can be brought up here and by innuendo or by direct allegation be shown to be a racist, sexist, bigoted homophobe pig.
Simply on the basis that they're conservative.
They are trying.
This man is a criminal.
This man is a suspect.
He's guilty.
He is OJ, and these Democrats are not gonna be as slip-shot as Marsha Clark was.
They're gonna nail this guy because they know he's a criminal.
Why?
Because he's a conservative.
That's the sum total of the intellectual aspect of their argument.
And the reason this is gonna fail, in addition to the specifics and the nature of the evidence uh related to their charge, is that it's old and tired and worn out, and they can't any longer get away with making the case that every Republican conservative judicial nominee is a monster.
They just can't.
I don't care who it is, it's Scalia.
It's Judge Roberts, it's Robert Bork, it's Clarence Thomas.
They are racist crooks, every one of them.
John Bolton was crooked.
No good Rumsfeld, no good Condoleezza Rice, no good John Ashcroft, no good.
And it's all innuendo, and they they just they can't get away with it.
Now to set this up, we've got to go back and play a couple audio sound bites.
We played them in the last hour, cuts 8 C and 8D, Spectre and Kennedy arguing about executive session and Kennedy's desire to subpoena the Library of Congress for these uh cap records from Princeton.
Kennedy says, uh, Mr. Chairman, if I could have your attention, I think we ought to vote on issuing a subpoena to the custodian of those cap records.
Quite candidly.
I view the request uh if it's really a matter of importance.
You and I see each other all the time.
You've never mentioned it to me.
And uh uh I do not ascribe a great deal of weight.
Uh we actually didn't get a letter, but uh You did get a letter, are you saying?
Well, now wait a minute.
Uh you don't know what I got.
I'm about to I do, sir.
Senator, since I sent it.
Well, the sender doesn't necessarily know what the recipient gets, Senator Kennedy.
I've got a you are not in the position to say what I receive.
If you'll if you'll bear with me for just one minute.
I am uh in a position to say what I sent to you on December 22nd.
Well, you're in your position to tell me what you renew my request, uh Senator.
And uh if uh I'm gonna be denied, then I'd ask I'd appeal the uh the decision of the chair.
Don't be premature, Senator Kennedy.
I'm not about to make a ruling on this state of the record.
Mr. Chairman, uh I'd appeal the ruling of the chair on this.
There's been there's been no ruling of the chair.
My request is that we go into the executive session for the sole purpose uh voting on a subpoena for uh these uh records that are held over at the uh Library of Congress for that purpose and that purpose only.
And if I'm gonna be denied that, I'd want to give notice to the chair that you're gonna hear have it again and again and again, and we're gonna have votes of this committee again and again and again until we have a resolution.
I think.
Well, Senator Kennedy, I'm not concerned about your threats to have votes again, again and again.
And I'm the chairman of this committee, and I have heard your request, and I will consider it.
And I'm not going to have you run this committee and decide when we're going to go into executive session.
Well, I am holding here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers some important documents that have just recently come to light.
Let's see, these documents, oh, they're from the New York Times.
November 27th of 2005.
Why, that was just a month and a half ago.
November 27, 2005.
Story by um David D. Kirkpatrick.
Uh headline from Alito's Past, a window on conservatives at Princeton.
In the fall of 1985, concerned alumni of Princeton was entering a crisis.
That's the Cap Group.
The group's members at the time included Samuel A. Alito, Jr., now President Bush's nominee to the Supreme Court, although there is no evidence that he played an active or prominent role in CAP.
The group had been founded in 1972, the year that Judge Alito graduated by alumni upset that Princeton had recently begun admitting babes.
It published a magazine, Prospect, which persistently accused the administration of taking a permissive approach to student life.
By the way, do you know the the source for this for the New York Times?
Senator Kennedy's website.
Senator Kennedy got this whole thing started on his website.
Robert Novak has written a column about the guy Senator Kennedy brought out of retirement to come back and head up.
I'm getting that column now, because I'm going to give you the name of Senator Kennedy's staff member who is beside behind all of this in uh in just a second.
But let me get to the meat of this.
As Princeton admitted a growing number of minority students, concerned alumni charged repeatedly the administration was lowering admission standards.
By the mid-1980s, however, Princeton students and recent alumni were increasingly finding such statements anacronistic or worse.
By 1987, the group had sputtered out.
Mr. Morgan, Jonathan Morgan, a conservative undergraduate working with the group, asked its board members that fall in an internal memorandum is the issue the percentage of alumni children admitted or the percentage of minorities.
I don't see the relevance in comparing the two, except in a racist context.
Mr. Morgan's memorandum and other records of concerned alumni are contained in the Library of Congress in the papers of William A. Rusher, a leader of the group and a former publisher of National Review.
Those records and others at Mud Library at Princeton give no indication that Judge Alito, who sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, was among the group's major donors.
He was not an active leader of the group, and two of his classmates who were involved, and Mr. Rusher said they didn't even remember his playing any role in the organization.
The records that Senator Kennedy demands be subpoeded have been seen by the new York Times.
And they wrote what I just read to you November 27th of last year.
Those records and others at Mud Library at Princeton give no indication that Judge Alito, who sits on the blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, was among the group's major donors.
He wasn't an active leader of the group and two of his classmates who were involved, and Mr. Rusher said they didn't remember his playing any sort of role whatsoever.
So this is all typical Democrat thuggery.
It is an attempt on the basis of the seriousness of the charge to get people to believe it based on the seriousness, despite the fact that the nature of the evidence is that there is no evidence that what they are alleging is in fact true.
Pure and simple.
So uh and there's another newspaper story that basically says the same thing here.
It's a column, actually, in the New York Times or not a column in the New York Times, it's a column in a different newspaper.
Uh but all of this, you know, got going.
What is this?
Look at what you you look at Biden.
I wasn't even going to mention that Biden has gotten a little grief because he's been ripping Princeton.
He ripped Princeton is 25 minutes of questioning yesterday.
He ripped Princeton.
Even though he's tried to convince all three of his kids to go there.
He's ripped Princeton.
He's made a mockery of it.
He's he's told people to me to like it.
So now he's wearing a Princeton cap.
He had a Princeton baseball cap.
I'm telling you, the uh the these guys are just too much.
I I actually'm not surprised.
I but I my I'm gonna tell you my reaction, our reaction is instinctive, and it's typical, and a lot anybody else watching this and what the hell is this show going on?
So here's Senator Kennedy's big play, and there's nothing there nothing there nothing there to be found.
Uh well, I'm gonna I'll find that at the break.
But I'll get the staff member um I I remember the Novak column.
The Novak column warning everybody who Kennedy was going to bring out of retirement or bring out from some hole wherever he's currently working now to bring back and manage this whole thing.
Uh and the guy is sleaze.
Uh, I just can't remember his name off the top of my head, but we'll it's it's in the file.
I've just got to go get it.
Let me take a quick break.
We'll be back and continue here in just a second.
All right, Senator Kennedy, we got, you know, we've we've tracked all this down, and uh as usual, there's a there's a there's a a chain of command that all these things go through.
This turns out to have actually started with people for the liberal way.
Uh Norman Lear's group.
First things first.
Robert Novak in a column on August 25th of last year.
An alert this week from backers of Judge John Roberts' cautions not to take seriously.
Democrat complaints that they can't stop his confirmation.
A memo sent to thousands of conservatives, warns that the assault on President Bush's first nominee is yet to come.
A major reason cited for this belief is the man back at Senator Kennedy's side on the Senate Judiciary Committee, James Flugg.
It's hard to fathom Mr. Flugg coming back to Capitol Hill after 30 years of private practice for anything other than a bitterly tough confirmation fight, says the memo, signed by three prominent Roberts backers.
The Kennedy Flug Partnership blocking confirmation of Republican judges dates back to the defeat of Richard Nixon's nominee G. Harold Carswell and Clement Hainesworth.
As Kennedy's rhetoric intensifies, the atmosphere leading up to next month's Roberts hearings feels like the eve of battle.
Robin Novak writes, I have known Flugg while he was a Kennedy aide in the late 60s.
And in Kennedy's 80 campaign for president, he returned my call last week, and I asked him why at now 66 he would return to a job normally filled by somebody 30 years younger when he learned what I was after.
Flugg broke off the conversation.
I didn't get a chance to ask him about the nomination of Judge William Pryor, but I talked to several other sources.
When Flugg returned to Kennedy staff two years ago, he was immersed in the Kennedy-led attempt to reject Bush judicial nominees.
Alabama Attorney General Pryor, nominated to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, was a principal target.
That's the guy that is running all of this.
Now, here is an interesting little press release that we dug up.
We need to ask a question.
Who is it that Senator Kennedy represents at these hearings?
Why is Senator Kennedy demanding to subpoena these cap records, which the New York Times has already reviewed?
Well, if you go back to November 18th of 2005, I have a press release here from People for the Liberal Way.
PFLW seeking access to records of concerned alumni of Princeton.
Supreme Court nominee Samolito touted membership in reactionary organization.
People for the liberal way has requested access to the records of concerned alumni of Princeton stored at the Library of Congress in the archive of former National Review publisher William Rusher.
These records should shed more light on the activities and ideology of the highly controversial organization, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Now my question is this: will lobbying reform, now the talk of Washington, include ending this kind of control over members of Congress by left-wing radical groups because it is clear that people for the liberal way, and there are a bunch of these outfits out there on the left that are writing the questions for these nominees that are telling them the areas to explore, and they're ill-serving them, so I'm I'm hard pressed to want to do anything about it.
But here you have Ted Kennedy representing people for the liberal way, demanding records the New York Times has already seen we've got the press release that they proudly released November 18th of 2005.
So uh th this is not an individual United States Senator concerned about racism, sexism, bigotry, discrimination, or all that.
This is typical.
This is the usual suspects, these outdated, floundering, losing power, left-wing radical groups who have chains around the necks of the Democrats on the committee, and they are leading them in the direction they want them to go because the Democratic, you have to remember, the Democrats are a party made up of individual constituencies.
And if you'll note the way the questioning goes, Feinstein, she'll take care of what the Nags want asked.
Biden will take care of what he wants asked.
Leahy will take care of what the moveon.org wants asked.
Ted Kennedy will take care of what people for the liberal way want asked.
Uh Leahy will take care of what the unions want asked.
And that's how this is working.
Here's uh here's Conn in Leesburg, Virginia.
Let's go back to the phones.
Con, nice to have you on the program.
Welcome.
Hey, thanks, Lot Rush.
Giga Ditto's mega art, our last decade.
Um, I wanted to make the point that presidential power should be measured by Lincoln and not Nixon like the Democrats want.
And the reason is that Lincoln fought a military force in the United States that was by definition made up 100% of American citizens.
Um he detained them, he killed them.
And we have a covert force in our country trying to kill us, and they they can buy phones at at a at a store with no name tied to them, put time cards on them, go get internet mail at a coffee shop with no name tied to it.
How else are we going to fight them?
Well, you know, one one thing, I I uh you're you're talking about the National Security Agency stuff, and and I appreciate that.
We we we gave all kinds of examples last week and the week before of uh the things Abraham Lincoln did during his presidency at the time of the Civil War.
One of my favorite examples, as the Democrats are trying to portray a president out of control who doesn't care about your privacy and your civil liberties and will spy on you and will do whatever you want to do.
Try this.
There was a former member of Congress, a Democrat, who was running for governor of Ohio during the Civil War.
This man was speaking out against Lincoln, speaking out against the cause of the North, and defending and supporting the South.
Lincoln sent back then the equivalent of the National Guard, he sent the militia and literally kidnapped this guy in the middle of his campaign for governor of Ohio and shipped him down to Jefferson Davis in the South.
Calling him an agitator.
You are you are, you didn't use the word treasonous, but you are hampering our ability, this nation's ability to preserve its unity and our victory, and we're going to send you down to the enemies.
Well, Jefferson Davis didn't want this guy.
His name was Vandelwig or some such thing.
Vandingham Velandingham Villandigam is what it was.
And and the and the the South didn't want him because they couldn't trust him either.
So they sent him to Canada, probably the first conscientious objector.
They sent him to Canada, and the Canadians ended up not wanting him.
He ended up coming back.
Now, can you imagine if today George W. Bush looked at Dingy Harry or any of these other Democrats, call him agitators, say, you know what?
I am kidnapping you.
Send the National Guard up to the Senate, get Dingy Harry, and send him over to Pakistan or to Iran so he can be at home with the enemy he supports.
Or on whose side he seems to be invested, let's put it that way.
Nothing of the sort.
Lincoln Lincoln suspended habeas corpus back in the in the days of the Civil War, and of course all the civil libertarians are once these rights are gone, why they never come back.
Well, we got it all back.
We don't abscond and kidnap members of the opposition party and send them over to our enemies and habeas corpuses back.
But you have to understand the Democrats' attempt to compare Bush to Nixon is simple, like they're trying to compare this war to Vietnam.
They think those are their two glory events in recent modern times.
Media does too.
So they're simply trying to connect those dots and make people think this is just that being replayed, and it's not working.
I'll give you some evidence of that when we come back.
Sit tight, folks.
Don't go away.
Welcome back, folks.
I have stunning news.
This news has taken me aback.
This is such startling and shocking news.
I must leave our current topic in order to impart this to you.
It comes from the University of North Carolina School of Medicine.
A new survey has just been released.
study, Can Becoming an Adult Be Hazardous to Your Health?
A new study from the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, indicates that may be the case.
Leading health indicators showing serious declines as people age.
Yes, I know I know this is going to come as a shock to many of you, but for the first time we have documented university research that we have more health problems as we get older.
This is the first longitudinal study to track the development trends in health disparities among a national cohort of young people with new findings showing a general decline in health during the transition to adulthood.
So there you have it, folks.
It's official.
You get older, you lose your health.
Differing views on terrorism.
This is the Washington Post today, Dan Balls and Claudia Dean.
Bad news for the Libs.
The NSA flap is not working, and we know that's now because Ryzen's book has sold a paltry 8,700 copies in its first week.
Americans overwhelmingly support aggressive pursuit of terrorist threats, even if it may infringe on personal privacy.
But they divide sharply along partisan lines over the legitimacy of Bush's program of domestic eavesdropping without court authorization, this according to a new Washington Post poll.
I don't care how they delineate the lines here according to party loyalty.
Americans overwhelmingly support a get aggressive government pursuit of terrorist threats, even if it may infringe on personal privacy.
That's the poll.
That's the result.
Or refers to 66% support chasing terrorists.
51% are okay with wiretaps, which is not even really what we're talking about here.
But the bottom line is once again, it's like Abu Grab and Club getting all over.
The Dems are trying to make hay out of something the American people is wise enough to see is not worth making hay over.
They know that September 11th happened.
The Democrats are trying to portray events as though 9-11 never happened, and Bush is just an evil guy and has lied about getting us into a war.
There was no reason to go to war.
There's no reason to have a war, and there's no reason to get mad at people, and no reason to wiretap and say none of this is necessary.
And they actually think they can get away with creating this uh this aura, and they can't.
I I want to appeal to the uh Republican.
I know we have some influence here, I don't know how much, but I want to appeal to the uh demo the Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
As I read the LA Times today, and I was I felt a little sorry.
There's a there's a column here by Stephen Dojack.
Does the name Stephen Dojak uh ring a bell, any of you?
Stephen Dojack was on the original witness list released by the Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.
Now, dojack was to be an expert witness on the uh this this cap organization, concerned alumni of Princeton.
And it had been learned That Stephen R. Dojack has famously written that the slaughter and consumption of animals in this country for food is equivalent and no different than the Holocaust.
This news was broadcast wildly last week, led by this program and the Drudge Report, and the Democrats pulled Mr. Doo Jack from the witness list.
Disappointing me.
We want to hear from these people.
Today, Mr. Dojack is crying about this in an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times.
The headline is the Alito testimony you won't hear.
In 21st century Washington, fame doesn't last for 15 minutes anymore.
It lasts for a single news cycle.
There's the big press release.
The next morning the major newspapers spelled your name right.
By noon, the drudge report runs a shotgun blast of half-truths and innuendos.
And by evening, pundits are sifting through your entrails on CNN and Fox.
Can citizen participation in government survive the advent of the internet search engine?
Oh, come on, Steve, be a man about it.
You think this is the first.
All they did was uncover the truth about you.
For people like Robert Bork and Clarence Thomas, they dredge up lies and try to make people believe it.
We found the truth about you, and you can't take it.
You want to blame the internet and search engines?
And cry about it in the LA Times?
Well, don't blame me, Steve.
I wanted you to testify, and I still do.
And based on this shocking desperate cry, this desperate plea by Mr. Stephen R. Dojack in the LA Times.
He wants his fame.
He wants 30 minutes of fame.
He wants a day of fame.
He wants to be on this committee.
He wants to tell us about the concerned alumni at Princeton.
And then he can be asked about his views and the Holocaust being something morally equivalent with our feeding ourselves using animal husbandry.
I'd love to hear from the guy.
So I appeal to Senator Cornyn and others on the Republican committee to reinstate.
Well, it's actually not Senator Corning's job, but uh it was Senator Corny, uh, he he he also put out a press release explaining who this Stephen Doojak was.
I would appeal to Senator Leahy, because he's the ranking Democrat on the committee.
So I would like to appeal personally, in the spirit of goodwill, sportsmanship, and patriotism, reaching out across the aisle, in the interest of a fair hearing, and uh in a full illumination of the ideas.
To reinstate Stephen R. Doojak to the panel witness list yet to come in the hearings of Samuel Alito, nominated to be an associate justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.
Tim in Waukeshaw, Wisconsin.
Hello, sir.
Great to have you with us.
Hey, good afternoon, Rosh.
How are you?
Hey, never better, sir.
It's an honor and a privilege from Belling Country here.
Thank you, sir.
Listen, you uh mentioned the story earlier about the five uh guys that were on trial for the tire slashing in Milwaukee, but what you didn't mention is that the defense that's put forth, which I thought was interesting, uh admitted that this was part of a vast National Democratic uh party conspiracy to suppress uh Republican votes in this area.
When I didn't put that out because I didn't know it.
I had a I actually didn't have the latest story.
My my story was from the day before the trial was to start.
So you are telling me, I want to understand this, that these five thugs, the carry five, uh, as I as I will call them, uh, one of whom is the son of a congressperson there, uh what's her name?
Gwen Moore.
Newly elected.
No, Gwen Moore, Gwen Moore.
Yeah, all right.
Uh these these guys are saying, hey, don't blame us, blame the DNC.
That's right.
They're saying that these were operatives from outside of Milwaukee that came in that that were involved in this.
And so they're admitting basically that the event happened, and they're saying that it's part of a suppression of vote thing on the part of the National Democratic Party, and that's you know, you can't prove it with our guys that did it.
What what Oh it is our gang that did it.
So they're saying they didn't slash the tires.
They're admitting the tires were slashed, but they're saying you can't prove that it was our guys that might have been the out-of-towners for the national DMC.
That's all I was gonna say you can't.
They can't you the the these the the the carry five are saying you can't prove we slashed the tires.
We admit the tires were slashed, but there were so many DNC operatives in here designed to suppress the Republican turnout that day that it could have been any number of these people.
That is exactly the defense that's being put forth by and it's probably being paid by for by that Democratic.
I gotta love this.
I got these guys, they may think they're the big time, but a crip wouldn't sell out another crip like this.
Uh Stanley Stanley Stanley Stanley Tookie Williams went to the crypt rather than sell out to Crips.
Uh these guys are turning on the Terry McCauliffs of the world.
Well, and the amazing thing is that uh is that the Congresswoman is not being indignant, or she's not bringing forth any challenge and stating her, you know, disbelief that the re party would do that and and then hang her son out to try.
Well, that doesn't surprise me either.
These are Democrats.
Self-preservation counts before anything else, including family.
Absolutely.
All right, well, I appreciate that legal update.
I had no clue this is getting better than I thought it would be.
Now it's interesting, we're still not seeing one shred of coverage of the trial of the Carrie Five on CNN or Fox or MSNBC or anywhere else.
These are the guys we let off the program with this today.
These are the guys that slash the tires, 25% of the uh of the get out the vote fleet of uh the Republican buses and trucks and vans they had rented to get uh the infirm, as you will, uh, to the polls.
Tires were slashed, trying to cut back on the ability to get them to the polls, and uh uh yeah, they're basically disenfranchising the disabled, the liberals and democrats engaging in this.
And now these guys that that are accused of slashing the tires are blaming it on Terry McAuliffe, essentially.
They're blaming it on the Democratic Party.
The DNC sent operatives all of them.
Well, I know that Congresswoman's blaming it on Bush because Bush brings out the worst in everybody.
I mean, I I know, but it's folks.
Yeah, just have to love this.
There's certainly no reason to be intimidated by this.
Is there?
All right, folks, we have a limited amount of busy broadcast time remaining on today's excursion into broadcast excellence, and I want to get at least some other subjects talked uh mentioned some some fascinating stuff in the stack of stuff today.
Uh one one thing about the hearing, as I mentioned to you, Mr. Snurdley has a friend, an operative who is uh at the Alito hearings uh every day.
She's part of the group supporting Alito, their groups uh there that to oppose Alito, and when the hearings are over, everybody adjourns from the hearing room out into a foyer rotunda type area where the the esteemed uh members of the committee uh then meet the press and tell everybody what happened uh in the hearings today.
And uh Mr. Snerdley's uh closely held contact was standing right next to Senator Schumer while he was talking with his staff members after the hearings last night.
And she reports this was today, oh, today I'm sorry, this was today during the lunch recess.
I'm sorry.
This is today during a lunch recess.
And Snerdley's friend overheard Schumer say this to his staffers, and this is a quote.
It is clear that Alito is trying to go to us into getting mad.
They want to get a rise out of us.
So Schumer believes that the Leto's sitting there and in acting cool comma collected just to tick the Democrats off so they'll lose their composure.
And I guess if that's the strategy it worked on Senator Kennedy.
But frankly, I I I don't I this is this befuddles me, Mr. Sturdley, because these people are perpetually mad.
When nobody has to do anything to get a rise out of them, they're never happy.
They're constantly irritable and mad and angry, they're enraged, outraged all the time.
You don't have to do anything.
They get out of bed that way.
They probably sleep that way.
All right, some of these other news items here from Reuters.
German scientists have discovered a new source of methane, which is a greenhouse gas second only to carbon dioxide in its impact on climate change.
What is this new source of methane?
The culprits are plants.
They produce about ten to thirty percent of the annual methane found in the atmosphere, according to researchers At the Max Planck Institute for Nuclear Physics in Heidelberg.
The scientists measured the amount of methane released by the plants and controlled spearmints.
And they found that's for you and Rio Linda.
They found it increases with rising temperatures and exposures to sunlight.
Waha damn.
God is to blame for global warming.
Here's a shocker for you.
An Egyptian cleric's controversial fatwa claiming that nudity during sexual intercourse invalidates a marriage has uncovered a rift among Islamic scholars.
According to the religious edict issued by Rashad Hassan Khalil, a former dean of Al-Azhar University's faculty of Islamic law, being completely naked during the act of coitis annuls the marriage.
The religious decree sparked a hot debate on the private satellite network Dreams popular religious talk show and on the front page of Al Masri Al Yam, Egypt's leading independent daily newspaper, Swad Saleh, who heads the women's department at Al-Azhar's Islamic Studies faculty, pleaded for anything that can bring spouses closer to each other and rejected the claim that nudity during intercourse could invalidate a union.
They had a lies, a live televised debate about this.
Now, this you know, things happen in strange ways.
We know that the uh American left uh by some reasoning has found itself invested in the in the defeat of uh our ability to conquer this enemy.
They really have.
They are trying that's what these Ryzen book, the NSA leaks, uh, all this is it is a coordinated attack designed to prevent us from achieving victory over this enemy, militant Islam.
But I'll tell you, when people like Ted Kennedy find out that you can't get naked during sexual intercourse, uh may change things.
You know, stranger things have happened.
Wars have turned on some of the silliest things, folks.
Uh, and let's see, what uh oh, Sony.
Sony Music has launched the first major music label dedicated to nurturing lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender artists.
The label, Music with a twist, is a joint venture with Wilderness Media and Entertainment, the company led by Matt Farber, who has founded MTV's new gay and lesbian uh uh channel logo.
Mr. Farber said this is an idea whose time has come.
The label plans to release various compilations geared toward gay and bisexual audiences featuring hit songs by established artists that have been embraced by gay, bisexual, and transgender audiences as well as tracks from emerging gay artists.
Wonder if we'll get video of emerging uh gay artists.
You never know with MTV.
I understand that the uh the No, no, no, the label is called Music with a Twist.
Sony Music, first major music label dedicated to nurturing lesbian gay nurturing, nurturing these artists.
And uh it's it's music with a twist.
And uh uh I've got some inside information on this.
The first CD release, songs inspired by Bearback Mountain, including the hits Home on the Range, The Bath Houses of Laredo, and Dancing Cheek to Cheek Stand Behind Your Man.
We'll be back after Arlen Spector's talking to Senator Kennedy.
Apologize for not getting his letters saying, Well, you know these things happen.
We get a lot of stuff in here, but uh usually something important, a member will come tell another member that I've sent you a letter, and I run into Senator Kennedy in a gym uh every morning.
We're there at the same time.
And, you know, with Senator Kennedy involves, uh, is involved in a story like this.
You wonder, well, who was in the middle?
You just I don't know.
By the way, George Bush yesterday warned Democratic critics, just want to leave you this, warned Democratic critics of his Iraq policy to watch what they say or risk giving comfort to our adversaries and suffering at the ballot box in the U.S. congressional elections in November.
He said that yesterday, and today he said Iran has made a serious miscalculation by resuming their nuclear program.
And that's it, folks.
It's been fun as always.
We'll look forward to tomorrow being right back here in the saddle at the EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute.
And well, whatever happens between now and then will be on top of it.
▲
Export Selection