All Episodes
Previous Next
April 14, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:26
April 14, 2006, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
And we have the next drive-by media hit taking place, ladies and gentlemen, right before our very eyes and ears.
The next drive-by media hit is Rumsfeld should resign.
It's either Rumsfeld or Rice or Cherdoff, Cheney, a never-ending drumbeat.
I will explain to you how this all happens.
Greetings, my friends, the Rush Slimbaugh program ready to go on Friday.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's Open Line Friday.
The day has sort of a holiday-like feel to me.
And I know it is a holiday for many of you who are unimportant and unnecessary to the American economy.
You can take the day off, but those of us who matter, we're here.
You can count on us.
We don't take every opportunity for a holiday to take the day off.
That's not us here at the EIB Network.
We're here flexing our muscles and ready to rock.
The telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
All right.
We got another substitute working today.
As you know, all week long because Brian's been on his, we hope it's a honeymoon.
The management trainee replacing him has been here, Lark Hadley from LA.
We brought him in to be management trainee engineer, doing a great, great job.
Our call screener today is out, and one of our original call screeners, Mr. Snerdley, has switched chairs today.
He's gone from the program observer chair to the call screener chair.
Now, I need to warn some of you about Mr. Snerdley.
His patience wears thin.
He doesn't suffer fools easily.
I've had to suspend him numerous times.
I did.
I once suspended him for 45 minutes because I could see him yelling and screaming in the caller.
We invite you to call, and he will not be rude.
I can't hear him, but if I look through the window and I see him getting all exercised about things, I will not hesitate to step in.
And we've talked about this.
I'm not issuing any warning here that he is unaware of.
As you know how Open Line Friday works, Monday through Thursday, we talk about the things that I care about.
On Friday, we can throw in what you care about on the phones.
And the number to call, if you'd like to join us today, 800-282-2882.
All right, yesterday afternoon, at the conclusion of yesterday's program, I went over to a local theater to watch a private screening of United 93.
And I invited some people to go with me, and a number of them didn't want to go because they were just afraid it would knock them out.
And you've heard some of the complaints from the theaters that have shown a trailer to this movie, the Upper West Side of New York and other places around the country.
No, no, it's too soon.
It's too soon.
I can't bear it.
It's too soon.
It's not too soon.
If anything, it's too late.
I wish this movie had been out two or three years ago.
Now, I'm not a movie critic, and I have to be careful here that in describing it, I don't give it away.
I mean, what can you give away?
You all know what happens in this movie.
That's the thing.
This movie is real.
Well, it portrays actual events, and it tries to duplicate them as closely as possible.
So when you watch this, it's about an hour, 40 minutes, hour, 45.
When you watch this, you know you're watching.
You know what's going to happen at every stage?
Well, you know what's going to happen in the areas you know.
Some of the behind-the-scenes things that are portrayed in the movie, you'll see for the first time.
And I don't know how accurate those are.
For example, the North American Defense Command out of Rome, New York, the military up there that's designed to identify rogue aircraft entering our space are actually prepared as portrayed as bumbling incompetence, unable to keep track of domestic airliners when they've turned their transponders off.
And they're issuing orders all over the place, and nobody's getting anything done.
They scramble a couple of F-16s, but they don't have any weapons on them, and they send the F-16s out over the Atlantic Ocean, thinking that more hijacked international airlines are coming in rather than chase the hijacked airlines westward.
And the air traffic control people, they're portrayed, the whole movie is powerful.
I think there's not that much gore in it.
A lot of people that I invited didn't want to go because they're just afraid of the gore.
There isn't that much.
There's some, but there isn't that much.
But it is just, there's a piece of footage of the second plane hitting the World Trade Center that I had not seen before.
And it looks like this footage was shot from across the river, like maybe the control tower at Newark International Airport.
And this one shows the speed with which that second plane hit the tower.
I mean, it's just, it looks like it was barreling along.
You don't see planes flying this fast, this low, normally, not civilian airliners.
And I guess the focus of the movie, the people on Flight 93, United Flight 93.
And without giving too much away here, one of the things I told people who asked, well, what'd you think of it?
Well, it's tough today in 2006 not to watch this movie within the prism of your own political opinions and attitudes about life in the country today.
It'd be much, yeah, I think people will have a different perception of this if they had watched this movie, which it'd be impossible to do, but a couple of three days after it or even six months after it had happened.
But there's been a lot of years that have passed.
And in that time, a lot of events have happened regarding the war on terror that have shaped political opinion in this country in wide and diverse ways.
For example, it is my opinion that the Kukfringe left, after watching this movie, will come away blaming Bush all over again.
Despite the fact that the overwhelming emotion I had was sheer anger at the terrorists, bordering on hatred.
I was gripping the arms of my seat, my chair.
They are not portrayed sympathetically.
And that's important.
I have seen a lot of movies made in the last couple of years.
I forget the name of this movie, but Jodi Foster was in it.
And her daughter was hijacked from her, on board an airplane, and there were four Arabs on board.
And she was convinced they were the guilty ones.
And they were holding her daughter hostage.
None of the crew would help her find her daughter.
The Arab-looking guys ended up being the angels.
They were honest.
They were the great guys.
And the conspirators and the bad guys were the pilot, co-pilot, and a flight attendant.
This movie is not that.
This movie does not portray the hijackers sympathetically.
You will not like these people, and that's important.
And I think that's the vast reaction the vast majority of people who watch the movie are going to have.
There will be, and the reason I say the kook fringe left will be able to blame Bush.
C. Bush is incompetent because of one passage in the movie.
The air traffic control people or the national air, I'm not sure it was air traffic control or if it was the, it's something to do with the FAA.
The head of this organization trying to get hold of the president or vice president to authorize military jets to go up and shoot these hijacked planes down.
And he comes in, his chief aide comes in, says, I can't find the president.
We can't get hold of him.
We don't know where the vice president.
We can't.
So it appears that on the morning of these attacks, the president and vice president are nowhere to be found.
Well, we know the president was in Tampa, and he was in a classroom with some school kids, and we know that that has been lampooned by the left in Michael Moore's whatever you want to call that piece of propaganda.
So the left will say after they watch that, as shallow as they are, as kooky as they are, and as off the deep end as they are, this movie will, in that one little passage alone, probably confirm for them that they're right all along, that this is Bush's fault.
But anybody with half a brain, with any rationality at all, cannot help but just be angry at the terrorists.
And this movie is going to refocus on the minds of those who see it the exact reason we are in the war on terror.
The footage of the Twin Towers being hit is there.
One thing I think should have happened, but didn't, the towers do not fall in this movie.
And I don't know if they did that because they wanted to keep the chronology accurate, but I thought it would be impactful if the towers fell in this movie.
I'm not going to tell you how they portray the crash of United 93.
It could go any number of ways on that, and it was one of the things I was most curious about.
But the passengers themselves are the focus of this, even though they start with all the four planes that were hijacked.
They track that from the moment it happened.
They show the terrorists getting up, praying the night before, getting on these airplanes, sitting there nervously waiting to make their moves and so forth.
But once you get into the actual United 93 portion of this, these passengers are portrayed as heroes, gutsy.
They are inspirational.
This is a movie that's going to, I think for those who go to see it, are going to walk out of there with, well, you're going to walk out in shock because here's an attempt to accurately portray what goes on and went on on a doomed hijacked airliner where the good guys actually win.
This is the only one of the four that did not reach its target.
But these people are portrayed as inspirational heroes and gutsy.
They learn the other three planes have hit their targets via phone calls that they're making.
They make these phone calls in secret without the two terrorist watchdogs knowing that they're doing it.
And after a while, they all decide, you know, Todd Beamer said, let's roll.
And the sequence where they take down the two hijackers watching them.
And then literally, I almost don't want to describe this to you, but the way they take over the cockpit and the raw emotion and anger that they are exuding, it's indescribable.
You cannot help but think it's real.
It shot all of this in the airplane shot with a handheld camera, so it's jerky and it moves around and the music is powerful.
I couldn't tell a melody, of course, but it was a great production.
Now, I don't know if I saw a pre-release print or if I saw the final version, but there was no cast.
They rolled the credits, but no cast identified.
And I didn't know if that was on purpose or if they just haven't gotten around to doing it.
The movie opens on 28th.
If they don't have cast mentioned in it, it's because they don't want to identify these heroes on this plane and actors playing them.
But again, that could just be that this is a pre-release print that we saw yesterday.
Let me take a brief time out here.
We'll come back, get ready to go with all the other things.
What's your phone calls coming today on Open Line Friday on the EIB Network?
Hi, welcome back.
It's Rush Limbaugh Open Line Friday.
Let me Open Line Good Friday, actually.
Let me add a couple more things about the movie I wrote.
One of the things that, you know, we all watched it.
We walked out to the lobby of the theater.
We were discussing it.
And one of the things somebody asked me was, do you think we've learned anything?
And I said, you're talking about the way air defenses are portrayed.
Yeah, yeah.
And I said, well, obviously half the country hasn't learned anything.
He said, I see what you mean.
I'm not even talking about air defenses.
I'm talking about the people of the country.
Half the, if, well, not half.
I'm assigning a statistical half of the country to the Libs.
It's not that large.
Whatever percentage, the Libs haven't learned anything.
They still don't think this is worth it.
They still don't think that this enemy is worth it.
And I tell you what, these generals and everybody out there demanding that Rumsfeld retire or resign or be fired.
You tell me who that's going to benefit.
What difference is it going to make?
Put somebody new in with 32 months to go.
What difference?
This is all a plan designed to take down Bush.
This is all a plan to take down this administration.
Rumsfeld's just the latest target.
They may have genuine animosity for him.
Probably means he's effective.
Most of these ex-generals are ex-Clinton era guys, Zinni and this stuff.
We've got details on some of these people.
Let you hear what they said about Iraq back when they were running the show.
Sounds identical to what you hear Rumsfeld say about Iraq building up to this current war that we're having.
But I think that whatever percentage of the country is made up of kooks, fringe liberals, and so forth, they have not learned the lesson of 9-11.
And I have no clue if they venture into a theater to watch this, if they will learn anything from it other than stoking their irrational assessment that it's all Bush's fault.
And they truly believe that.
And they truly believe that Bush is creating more terrorists or Rumsfeld or whoever.
But this movie is one of the things that amazed me was how gripped I was.
There's not a moment I looked at my watch.
Okay, how long we had to go on this?
I usually do that during every movie I watch.
At some point, I look at the watch to see how long I've been watching.
It didn't do that once.
Didn't do it till the movie was over.
Had no idea how much time had passed.
The way this is put together, it's suspenseful from the moment it opens.
And I think that's incredible given that everybody knows ultimately what's going to happen.
You know at every stage of this movie what's going to happen when you're watching the radar of American Flight 11 leave Boston until it leaves the screen when they turn off the transponder in the cockpit.
You know what's going to happen.
And yet, and, you know, there's a part of me that was one little moment where I said, gosh, I hope what I know is going to happen doesn't happen.
Just one fleeting moment, because now that when you're watching it, you see it, we know the past.
Can we stop it from happening again?
And that was the question I was asked.
Have we learned anything?
And I think based on the Masawi trial, yeah, we're trying to fix a lot of things.
The Patriot Act, you look at this boondoggle.
I mentioned this a little bit yesterday.
The Masawi trial, his death penalty phase, the government's seeking death on the basis that Masawi could have stopped 9-11, but he didn't tell anybody.
And that may be legally, factually true.
But I'm still amazed that here's the big, bad U.S. government depending on a conspirator to admit it, or we have no chance.
The government's running around saying, well, he didn't tell us.
Don't blame us.
He didn't tell us.
He's got to die.
Fine, put him to death.
He deserves it.
But you find out why we couldn't ask him.
We couldn't ask him what he could.
We couldn't look at his computer because of the wall that Jamie Gorellic and the Clinton administration had built.
We couldn't share information.
The FBI couldn't share information with the CIA and any of this because of the Clinton-era wall on fighting these terrorists in legal proceedings using grand jury testimony.
That's secret.
A lot of other reasons for the wall as well.
So Bush comes and has to clean up the mess left by the Clinton people who were inattentive to real problems.
You've got the Patriot Act.
We've got the NSA foreign surveillance program.
Democrats trying to kill it.
They tried to kill the Patriot Act the second time around applauded when they thought they had.
So you ask, have we learned anything?
I'm not sure.
In fact, I'm damn sure that a significant portion of the country hasn't learned diddly squat because they're so poisoned with partisan rage that they haven't the guts to face up to the fact that we have an enemy.
Their enemy is George W. Bush.
If we try to push Rumsfeld out, if you people join it, not you, but if people join this effort of these ex-generals, which is the latest drive-by media hit to get rid of Rumsfeld, it's only going to benefit the enemy.
They're going to be laughing themselves silly in the caves on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border and over in Tehran and some of the mosques in Iraq.
They're just going to be rubbing their hands in glee.
And they're going to be thanking their allies, the ex-generals of the past Clinton administration, Democratic Party, and the Democratic Party in this country.
For some reason, there seems to be an ongoing effort to try to sabotage any effort we make to defeat this particular enemy.
This attack on Rumsfeld is an attack on Bush and the war effort.
It would be a huge victory for the enemy.
And who are they going to confirm in his place?
Well, Sen Cheney over there.
Oh, that would really go great.
Can you imagine a confirmation hearings for a new Secretary of Defense?
It'd be all about torture and so forth.
They're reviving today in certain places on the internet, they're reviving all of these incidents where Rumsfeld was personally involved in torture.
Well, Hell's Bells, go see this movie and tell me if you wouldn't want to do something to these creeps that did this to us.
This movie will revive this kind of emotion in you.
The idea that it's just frustrating as hell, especially having seen the movie, to come out and understand that there's a significant portion of this country, the drive-by media, who wants to treat these people that hijack these airplanes and want to do it again and want to do it in an even greater impact and greater numbers, treat them like just innocent little kids.
We shouldn't be tough.
It boggles the mind.
So I don't know if we've learned anything as a full nation.
No, we haven't.
I hold out hope and I pray that the majority of the country has learned a lesson you'd think the Dubai port deal would indicate that they have and some of the opposition to immigration.
Be back.
Don't go away.
By the way, you know, ladies and gentlemen, one of these generals, I think Baptiste, yeah, retired Major General Jean-Baptiste, one of several high-ranking military men urging the ouster of Rumsfeld, said Friday, there is no coordinated effort to get him fired, calling a recent series of critical statements absolutely coincidental.
Yeah, it just all happens at once, doesn't it?
And it's just coincidental and just an accident.
Yes, how stupid do they think we are?
Let me tell you how this works.
He can't do this without the drive-by media.
And I'm going to tell you, this is exactly how this works.
Now, they didn't get all together.
Generals didn't call each other and they didn't all get in the room and say okay, this week we launch.
It wasn't like that.
One guy, one general probably Zinni, since he's the most long-term complainant on this, but I don't know who it is one of them will go talk to the media and he will tell the media.
You know, I'm not the only one.
There's a bunch of generals, bunch of flag officers think the same thing and, of course, the drive-by media reporters say who?
And well, let me whisper the names to you.
Bam, so Zinni, or whoever it is, mentions all these other names and that's all it takes.
Drive-by media gets on the phone with the camera crews and they go out and they find all the guys that this one general happens to mention.
So it doesn't take a meeting with the generals coordinating everything.
All you'd have to do is understand how to play the drive-by media like a strativarius, and that's what they've done.
No, there's no question.
This doesn't happen like this, accidentally or coincidentally.
This could not happen without the drive-by media.
Here we've.
We've illustrates this very easily.
Uh, grab audio soundbite number one, we have a montage of practically everybody who's on cable television and broadcast news describing this.
Uh, and this is from last night.
This morning, you name it, revolt of the generals.
Six retired generals call for defense secretary Rumsfeld to resign.
The revolt by former generals against defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld is growing.
Should defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld resign?
Five recently retired generals calling on the secretary of Defense to resign.
A revolt of the generals calling for defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld to go.
Two more retired generals have come out saying that Donald Rumsfeld should step down.
Five other retired generals calling for secretary Rumsfeld to resign.
The chorus of retired generals is getting louder.
Six are calling for Rumsfeld to resign.
Six retired generals calling for Rumsfeld's resignation.
Six retired generals adding their names to the resignation roster.
Two more retired generals called for his resignation.
Six retired generals now, and counting the ranks of retired generals calling for Donald Rumsfeld to resign are growing.
Six retired generals have publicly called for Rumsfeld's resignation.
The fourth now general says he should resign.
Six retired generals, 15 stars all together, aligned against Donald Rumsfeld.
All right.
So you see folks, I mean this.
The meeting just eats this set.
This is the latest drive-by hit and all it takes is for one general to call somebody in the media, yeah, i'm coming out tomorrow.
I'm going to say Rumsfeld's got to go like a dog panting after it's run in the hot sun and and and and.
Well, the general says yeah, a couple others that agree with me on this.
Who are they?
And memo we get last night and today and next week there'll probably be some more.
You know they want to get in on the act here uh, but who benefits that?
You could say okay, if the, if the White House or Rumsfeld cave here, if they if, if they do this if, if this is unthinkable.
It is unthinkable.
What are these people thinking?
This is actually going to result in Rumsfeld's resignation.
Does George W Bush want to give the drive-by media and these ex-generals who are writing books and hoping to make money on all this he's gonna?
Is he actually gonna take action?
Will transfer power of that type to these ex-generals in the drive-by media?
You think Rumsfeld will?
Well, let's say that they did.
Let's say that they did.
Let's say they cave on this.
I hope they don't, but let's say they can't.
Imagine Bush is not the Bush.
I know if he caves on this, but if he does okay, we got to have a replacement.
What could he do?
Well, he could send uh, he could send Condi over to the uh vice presidency and get her set up for 08, while sending Cheney over to the Pentagon to be secretary of Defense.
That would remember.
One of my old theories long time ago was for Bush to go out and make so much damn news that the drive-by media couldn't pick one item to focus on for a week and just get them all confused.
So if you send Cheney over to what's his face, the Pentagon, you send Condoleezza, get her out of the State Department, send her over to vice presidency, and you've got confirmation hearings and all this, and then maybe you throw McClellan out of there and put some new spokesman in in the White House press.
Oh, you could cause all kinds of havoc.
And you could get the drive-by media just totally distracted.
And then Bush could rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic, as they would say.
I mean, the latter might be fun, but I hope it doesn't happen.
This is such a setup.
This is, this is, this says, who wants to use the military?
what uh i'm i'm he i'm i'm missing what you're talking about Snurdley's sending me a note.
What Denver wanted to use the memo, use the military for what?
Oh.
Oh, you mean Bush's incompetent use of it?
Or they want to appropriate.
Oh, okay.
There was.
Now I got to remember.
Okay.
A Democrat strategy memo written by Dingy Harry.
And it did target the military.
They were going to come out and they were going to accuse Bush of being incompetent in use of the military.
And Rumsfeld will be part of that.
Okay, so this is the fruition of that memo.
This is.
I'm sure this is not coincidental.
And it's not hard.
Zinni will come out against Rumsfeld or Bush any day of the week, old Clinton guy.
We'll tell you a little bit more about Zinni here in just a second.
Before we go any further into this, ladies and gentlemen, we have Katie from Michigan on the phone.
Remember, she last spoke with us, a little bit afraid of the reaction her professor in political science got after having been mentioned by her on this program.
She called his class Communism 101.
I wanted to know how what she got on her paper in terms of a grade.
And I guess you got your paper back, right, Katie?
Yes, I did.
And tell us the news.
Well, I got a B- on a paper.
A B minus.
How do you feel about that?
I'm sorry.
How do you feel about that?
I think it's good, actually, because my teacher pulled me aside and explained to me why I got that grade.
And so, yeah, it's a fair grade.
I think he wanted me to go into more detail.
But yeah, I just thought you would want to know.
I did want to know.
Well, now, is there a way we could see the paper?
Well, I guess I could email it to you.
I don't want to post it on the website or any of that.
I just, since he says it's not detailed, and since I was a little helper with you.
Well, no, I mean, I agree with him what he said.
Like, it wasn't detailed enough based on what he wanted.
But actually, I got in trouble for he didn't like that I said capitalism needs no defense.
See, I knew that.
See, that's my fault because I told you that should be the theme.
Capitalism needs no defense.
And his beliefs are the ones that need defense.
Capitalism works every time it's tried.
Socialism, communism.
So you did that.
You'd started by capitalism needs no defense.
I'm proud of you.
Well, I did that, but he said don't do that for an academic paper because you need to be able to defend, you know, present both sides.
And I don't think I did a very good job of presenting the other side.
What other side?
What other side did you not present?
Marx's views.
Marxism's failures.
Yeah.
So I guess I just, I don't know.
Well, I guess you can read it.
Wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
Didn't he tell ⁇ was it the subject of the paper you had to defend capitalism?
Well, my arguments would have been stronger if I would have laid out Marx's views a little better and explained.
Well, a professor knows them.
I know, but to be a persuasive writer or speaker, you must give both sides and let people decide for themselves what they want to believe.
I guess this is why I would have never made it in college.
That sounds like a journalism class.
I thought you're in political science.
I thought the assignment was to defend capitalism or some such thing.
And now you're telling me you had to give a better presentation of both of these so-called competing views.
One of them has never won diddly squat.
It's not even a competitor.
Well, I mean, he wanted to know that I learned what Marx thinks.
Not necessarily that I would agree with it, just that I would be able to point out exactly what it is.
Well, now that makes sense because one thing, yeah, when you've established the premise that capitalism needs no defense, and then you go on and write under that premise, then it would be helpful if you would offset your examples of positive examples of capitalism with a corresponding list of the problems with Marxism.
If you didn't do that, you did miss an opportunity to powerfully persuade whoever would read the paper.
Right.
Oh, you learned.
I mean, you're just...
I did.
I...
I've learned a lot, and I also have learned that, you know, it's just sad to me, at least, that Americans, we've kind of gotten ourselves into a screaming match with one side or the other.
Like, I mean, I'm trying to learn both sides, and it's just hard with a lot of issues that I'm trying to figure out what my view is to decide, you know, because people just want, they don't want to listen to the other side.
So I think that's been the hardest part for me right now in college.
No one wants to listen to what I have to say.
And sometimes I don't want to listen to what other people have to say, but I'm trying to learn to at least hear people out and stuff.
Yeah, that's good.
But, you know, tell you a little bit about this persuading other people business.
We do live in a highly charged political climate, very partisan right now.
The important thing is to stand up after you learn it, and it's become part of your core.
The important thing is to always stand up for it.
And you never know who you're going to persuade.
Most likely, the people that you end up persuading, you'll never know.
They won't want to admit to you that you've persuaded them.
You never know the people you're going to influence in life when you stand up for who you are, when you have a well-defined core and you're not afraid or intimidated to express it.
You can go through the motions of hearing people out and so forth, and there's nothing wrong with that.
You'll learn from it.
You'll learn how to counter what it is they believe based on the core values and principles that you have.
But this has been the way the country's been within the population group that cares about all these political issues.
It's never been other than the way it is right now.
It's just being amplified because the media is getting so big and there's so much media now.
But you should go back and look when you have time.
Study some of the journalism at the days of the founding of this country during the Civil War.
I mean, journalism today is soft soap compared to some of the pamphleteering and the knockdown drag out stuff that was going on during the early days of the country.
It was really vicious back then.
That's why, I mean, it's bad today, too, but at least there's so much of it that things, everybody seems to think it's worse when they're alive than it's ever been.
But didn't back then newspapers kind of were made to kind of go along with one political party or the other.
They were more, way more partisan.
I mean, yeah, they were.
Well, that's arguable if they're more partisan.
Well, yeah.
The difference back then was, yeah, the papers willingly aligned themselves with parties.
Right, and people knew that.
I think that's the only thing that you're doing.
And yet, people knew it.
Today, papers and networks align themselves with parties and people, but deny it.
Right.
So you've got a great future here, Katie.
You've got the right desires.
You have the passion here.
I know that you have, I can tell when talking to you all these times, you have a thirst for learning and knowledge and so forth.
So don't lose that passion.
Well, thank you.
I really would like to meet you someday.
And, you know, if you ever need a researcher or intern, you know where to find me.
Well, no, I don't.
Oh, we know how to get a hold of her now.
Snurdley finally got your phone number.
That doesn't surprise me.
So we got, well, I want to give you, I'm going to have him call you, give an email address, because I would love to see your paper.
Okay.
Okay.
And I promise I won't show it to anybody or any of that.
Okay.
All right.
All the best, Katie.
Great to hear from you again.
Thank you very much.
All right.
Have a great weekend.
And you do the same thing.
And we'll take a brief timeout and be back right after this on Open Line Friday.
Hey, Katie, if you're still out there, I feel like getting you in some more trouble here.
We just finished talking with Katie from Michigan.
She got a B-minus on her paper in her political science class because the professor said she didn't do a good enough job presenting both sides, basically.
She shit her capitalism side well, and he said that she shouldn't have started with the premise capitalism needs no defense because it wasn't the purpose paper.
And she didn't get a good enough job explaining Marxism.
Katie, if you want to get in some more trouble, go ask your professor if he can explain both sides.
I'm sure he can explain Marxism to you, but ask him if he could explain capitalism accurately.
This is why I wouldn't make it as a college student.
About this Rumsfeld business.
Let me posed something.
I talked about this.
The fact that the generals and the drive-by media make this a big deal about Rumsfeld resigning practically ensures he's going to stay.
If Bush was thinking about firing him, he can't now.
He's not going to surrender that kind of power, apparent power, to the drive-by media and the generals.
If Rumsfeld wanted to quit, if he was thinking of resigning, he doesn't dare now.
He'd have to stay.
So essentially, the generals and the drive-by media get the opposite of what they want by virtue of their own behavior.
If keeping Rumsfeld or getting rid of Rumsfeld is actually what they want, maybe these ex-generals want Rumsfeld to stay because they think everything is such a disaster that his staying and their complaining about him will take all the heat off of them for anything they have failed to do in the historical context.
I mean, this is deep, folks.
Because you have to wonder, is the left and these generals this stupid?
They have to know that this cacophony demanding Rumsfeld's resignation practically guarantees he can't go anywhere and that Bush can't fire him.
You have to think they've got the smarts to figure that out.
So if they do, it means they actually want Rumsfeld to stay.
Then you've got to ask why.
Hmm.
Now, I have really botched the execution of the programming format in this hour because I went long with the call with Katie, and it means this segment is really short, and it's really not wise to do.
It's not good, and I apologize for it.
It sounds like more commercials than ever before, and we don't.
We haven't added any.
It's just this is not highly trained broadcast specialist format execution, and I promise that it won't happen too many more times.
All right, we've still got lots of news today.
Immigration news, the French have caved again, this time on a smoking ban.
They caved into smokers, and I love French smokers.
Anyway, we'll have the details of that and a whole bunch of other stuff.
▲
Export Selection