All Episodes
Previous Next
April 21, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:24
April 21, 2006, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
I know you people on Ditto Cam are panicking because all you saw was bars.
I forgot to turn it on, but it's on now, so uh a hearty welcome to all of you.
The Excellence in Broadcasting Network uh watching on the Ditto Cam at Rush Limbaugh.com.
And it amazes me.
I I I life is show prep.
I I just I do show prep for a living.
And I live show prep.
And there are some days it just amazes me, and it shouldn't.
It just amazes me that things keep happening.
You know, in a way that that uh uh make them uh just irresistible as topic discussion.
It's Friday.
Let's go show you what I mean.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida, it's open line Friday.
Well, by that I mean there's certain days, folks, as a as a highly talented uh and highly trained uh broadcast specialist.
Like everything in life, there are better days than other days.
Now, here every day is excellent, but some days are super excellent.
They're really and you'll wonder when those days are over.
Gosh, can we top this tomorrow?
Are we gonna be able to?
And lo and behold, show prep never fails.
If you look hard enough, it's out there.
In some places you don't even have to look hard.
All right, uh, you know the rules on open line Friday.
Uh basically when we go to the phones, uh, the show is all yours.
Whatever you want to talk about is what we talk about.
You don't have to be reacting to what I'm talking about.
You don't have to uh uh restrict yourself to things that uh only I care about.
We go to the phones, it's your show essentially.
You can ask uh uh anything, make a comment.
800-282-2882, the email address rush at eIBNet.com.
You know, have you seen Howard Dean and this uh immigration rant that he's on?
Well, now don't discount this, because if you if you go through all of the things the Democrats have tried to make a a big deal of, the Dean rant on border patrol and border control is is uh uh it is in itself a liberal entitlement, but the lesson to learn here is what are the real polls, the inside polls say about illegal immigration.
And you don't have to spend a lot of money to find this out now.
All you gotta do is listen to Howard Dean.
The answer can be found at Democratic National Committee.
Howard Dean yesterday called border security his party's top immigration priority for November.
Not top priority, not the environment.
Uh the he called it the top priority, not the environment.
Uh it's border security, not education, it's border security.
It's not the starving children in America, it's border security.
It's not even health care anymore.
It's border security.
Now, one of the things that I do as a highly trained broadcast specialist is read the tea leaves.
Read the stitches on the fastball.
And as a professional reader of tea leaves and the stitches on a fastball, the border security poll numbers must border on what?
For Dean to trash his whole agenda.
I know he had a caveat in there.
His party's top immigration priority is border security.
But there must they've they have to have some internal polling data at the Democratic Party that indicates this is a much bigger issue than they thought it was.
And of course, the there are Republicans today, conservatives, after having heard Dean's rant on this, that are I warned them.
I warned them that if they if they didn't get out in front of this issue as a party, that this was going to happen.
Uh you know, I I uh I don't know what it is that influenced Dean beside these poll numbers, but there has to have been uh something.
Now we've got other stories uh in the stack of stuff that will uh add to this and we'll detail things as we um uh peel back the hands of time today on the on the program.
Now get this.
This is this is uh this is the uh ninth circus uh court of appeals.
Public schools in California can bar clothing with slogans that are hurtful.
The uh Ninth Circus ruled this yesterday.
This is in a case of a student who wore a t-shirt saying homosexuality is shameful.
The two-to-one decision by three judge panel uh back to San Diego area high school's argument that it was entitled to tell a student to remove a t-shirt with that message.
The officials were concerned the slogan could raise tension at the scrule, where there had been conflict between gay and straight students.
The student sued, claiming the school's dress code violated his free speech, his religious freedom, and due process rights.
Writing for the panel's majority, the judge Stephen Reinhardt, and this guy, folks.
This guy is way, way out there to the left.
His wife is Ramona Ripston, uh, who apparently she's been on TV a number of times.
She's an ACLU chick.
You know, I can you imagine life in these two people's house?
I think of these liberals.
I can't I just think of them living their private lives and what they must do behind closed doors, and you know it isn't fun.
You know, they're just sitting there wringing their hands and worried about the fate of communism and what can we do to rest re-energize it and so forth.
I I just I do.
I the I share these innermost thoughts with you.
I think of these libs behind closed doors, and I I just the last thing I see them doing is enjoying life.
I see them fretting all the time.
Anyway.
Reinhardt affirmed the uh lower court's decision against an injunction against the scrule, said scruels may bar slogans believed to be hurtful.
Students uh who may be injured by verbal assaults on the basis of a core identifying characteristic such as race, religion, or sexual orientation, have a right to be free from such attacks while on scrual camp eye.
Uh Reinhart wrote, the demeaning of young gay and lesbian students in his scrual environment is detrimental not only to their psychological health and well-being, but also to their educational development.
In his dissent, the judge Alex Kaczynski said the majority would gag campus deceit, uh, or dissent, rather, I'm trying to read too fast here, to uh the high school's policies.
It would gag campus dissent to their policies.
The types of speech that could be banned by the school authorities under the school hate policy are practically without limit, Kacinski said.
Any speech code that has at its heart avoiding offense to others gives anyone with a thin skin a heckler's veto.
Something the Supreme Court has not approved of in the past.
This is exactly right.
Now, you people wonder why were you spending so much time on this, right?
I've dealt with this my entire broadcast career.
You know, I've and I'm not advocating this particular t-shirt here, homosexuality shape.
I that's not that's not the point.
The point is like Mr. Sturdley when I were talking about this story today.
He said, Well, who gets to sit there and decide what's hurtful?
And I said, the hurt.
So we're gonna have a new group.
We already have the offended.
If you go back to the archives of this program, I have told you who the offender.
There's a professional business.
The offended are political correctness aficionados, and they and they shut things up that they don't want to hear by claiming that it offends them.
And this is the way the minority reaches out and gags the majority.
Judge Kaczynski is exactly right here.
You know, I you, my theory on being offended, nobody has the power to make me feel offended.
It's up to me.
You know, I'm sitting around and people do that.
I don't get offended, for I really don't get offended.
I have not only a thick skin, but I I'm not gonna let somebody have that kind of power.
Can you imagine being such an emotional vegetable that you go through life and and you're just scared to hear anything?
Because it might offend you.
What kind of life is that?
It's like when you have a recession.
Don't play.
Now, speaking of that, you see this Fox News opinion dynamic poll.
The economy's roaring, but people don't think it is.
They admit that they don't think it is, and there are a number of reasons for it.
Uh the one of the reasons is, well, the war in Iraq.
I mean, who wants to have a perpetual war in our future?
Uh and and so forth.
Then you've got you've got uh uh other people in the poll, and it's really striking.
I mean, it's something like seventy-five percent, if I saw it correctly, who um agree that the economy is doing well, but they don't think so.
And and it doesn't feel right, and and and so forth.
And then a companion story, conservatives and republicans just can't get any credit for the great employment news and the great uh uh economy it's going on, and they're frustrated over it.
Well, I wonder why they can't get any credit for it.
Let me give you there's a there's a there's a there's an easy as hell explanation for this.
Everybody knows that for for eons, back pocket issues, i.e., the economy, have been factor numero uno in determining election results.
Well, here we are in election year, and we have an undeniably great economy.
Now, what else what else do we have?
We got Democrats who've been talking it down for five years.
We got Democrats talking about it being a supleine economy, that the rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer, the middle classes evaporating.
There's no chance for success in America.
The American dream is dead.
They've been doing this for five years.
And this cacophony, this never-ending doom and gloom, after that many years, even with the um uh end of the monopoly of the drive-by media, there's no question it has an impact and has had an impact on the Democrats simply cannot allow for the economy to be perceived as good news, particularly when they're gonna go screw it up.
If you listen to Hillary Clinton make speeches, she's gonna raise taxes on the rich and she's going to expand government, she's going to do national health care, all these things that have been demonstrated to fail worldwide, she's going to do.
And and the uh, as I said yesterday on immigration, one of the big reasons the Democrats are all for illegals is they need victims.
The economy's doing so well that we're producing fewer and fewer native victims.
Democrats need victims as voters, need victims as uh the recipients of their entitlement programs.
Democrats need victims so that they can basically have their sense of power.
Uh and and so they're the ongoing effort to talk down the economy and to uh suggest that it like we're on the verge of a housing bubble every day, we're on the verge of a stock market bubble every day, we're on the verge of a collapse every day.
That gold price, the oil price, the gasoline price, how in the world can we survive another day, Mabel, is the uh has been the general theme.
So there's no question that the impact has been what it is.
It's still it's still somewhat uh frustrating, but uh the doom and gloom will ultimately not play well because while there may be a lot of doom and gloom, people are not going to vote for it when it gets down to the nitty-gritty.
I know, I know that the uh the media is pushing the generic ballot.
The Democrats have a 10-point lead in the generic ballot in the upcoming congressional races.
That means they go out and they talk to um uh registered voters and say you're gonna vote Democrat or Republican.
They don't throw a name in there.
The Democrats always score better in these generic ballots.
That's time honored.
Uh of course, nobody's pointing, oh, wow, well, look at that.
The Democrats are like generic ballot, 10-point increase.
Uh, if you do an actual analysis of the seats that are competitive, uh, you find that the generic ballot doesn't mean diddly squat.
It's gonna be very difficult for the Democrats to win the House.
It's not the piece of cake they're suggesting.
That's not the point.
The point is, no matter who wins the house, what difference is it gonna make?
Wait, wait, wait a minute.
That doesn't make sense.
The cab driver, I heard about the cab driver.
The cab driver said the two guys got in a car and they acted like nothing had happened.
They were just having a good time.
Oh, he came back.
The cab driver picked up two more, and those two more said they were acting like things that have gone on.
Okay.
We're talking about the Duke rape case here.
Snerdley and I in a in a in a heated dispute here during the uh during the break.
Uh this the the second's the second Duke stripper did not see the alleged rape.
Uh this is an AP exclusive.
She's changing her story.
At first, a stripper who performed at a Duke University of the Cross Team Party doubted the story of a colleague who told the cops that she was dragged into a bathroom and rape, but now Kim Roberts isn't so sure.
She said, I was not in the bathroom when it happened, so I can't say a rape occurred, and I never will.
But after watching defense attorneys release photos of the accuser and upset by the leaking of both dancers' criminal past, she said she has to wonder about their character.
In all honesty, I think they're guilty, she said, and I can't say which ones are guilty, but somebody did something besides underage drinking.
That's my honest to God impression.
Now, this babe is also try to hire a New York PR.
Well, I don't know if she's hired them or just wants some free advice.
She emailed a New York public relations firm asking her letter for advice on how to spin this to my advantage, quote unquote.
She said she cannot let an opportunity like this pass without maximizing it.
I This This is ridiculous.
This this whole thing has now become a circus.
Do you know there was a murder in Durham this week on Tuesday night?
There was a murder.
There's a lot of violent crime.
Nobody's talking about that case because this case has been so splattered all over the media in a context that is irrelevant to the uh to the facts.
What what you what you have here, basically, ladies and gentlemen, is the typical media template of a clash of races.
And you've got it, it's even better than it, because then you've got these so-called rich white kids, spoiled, people of privilege, used to getting away with whatever they want, versus the two struggling, starving minority exotic dancers.
Just doing whatever they can to put their kids through school.
Oh, it's just such a horrible made the order for the meeting.
Then you've got a you've got a just an absolute hack, DA, who is you know getting ready to run for re-election, and he's out there trying the case in public.
Uh and and doing so for his own personal interests.
Today, uh one of his opponents actually went out and made a statement and Fox carried it.
Her name is Freda Black, and she um she said, This is appalling the way uh Nifwong the DA's handled this case.
It's appalling.
Uh Durham's a joke.
This is all kinds of rules, ethical rules for prosecutors have been violated here.
And she's right about that.
He's absolutely right.
I thought she made actually it's a pretty uh pretty good statement.
It was obviously a campaign appearance, uh.
And she was asked about that in the QA period.
Well, no, it's not a campaign appearance.
I'm speaking out because I'm worried about what's going on here in Durham, North Carolina.
At some point, all of you are gonna leave.
And when you leave, we're still gonna have the same problems we had before you got here.
She's talking to the media.
And I'm the one to fix these problems.
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
The typical typical campaign speech.
But this is getting absurd now.
Snurton and I were talking about the cab driver, who um has uh basically, with his testimony, there's no testimony yet, but his eyewitness account, uh, has uh given quite a lot of support to the uh alibi of Reed Sealigman.
Oh yeah, picked him up, they were in fine shape, didn't act like anything special going on in there, tipped me great, went to went to ATM machine, didn't complain about the fees at the ATM.
Uh then we then we went to the fast food joint and I took him back to the dorm.
Now you're telling me that the cab driver now says that there's uh two more guys call for a ride and and they were.
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh.
Okay.
Oh, okay.
The cab driver says, and I picked up two other guys.
And they were talking about the stripper.
And uh one said to the other, eh, she's just a stripper, don't worry about it.
Now that's throwing gasoline on the fire, too.
But, folks, can't we get can we really cut to the chase on this?
I I'm not the first to arrive at this uh theory, so don't misunderstand.
But no, Dawn, you she's Dawn's warning me trying to not try not to say it.
It's a typical woman.
You you don't even know what I'm gonna say, and you don't want me to say it.
She has no clue what I'm gonna say.
You know she already knows I'm wrong, right?
She already knows I'm in trouble.
Now, look, Phil Mushnick, uh, a buddy at the New York Post, I'm sorry for calling him buddy, that's gonna give him problems.
Uh, is sports writer, he wrote a piece today, and he said, you know, the problem here is not the clash of races.
The problem is you got young young men uh drinking and you've got a stripper and it's midnight.
What do you expect to have?
The biggest problem here that nobody's commenting on is what the hell was going on in that house in the first place.
Nobody's got any problem with the whole concept of what was going on.
If there hadn't been a rape, well, everybody had a good time and everybody would have been hooky dory or no allegation of a rape.
Uh and Mushnick's point is, what the hell?
We just gonna stand by and look as look look as scants at the specifics of this.
Well, that's uh it's it's well, you've got underage drinking going on.
That's not legal, and nobody wants to do anything about it, obviously.
And then you've got these guys hiring strippers.
Now, what do you when you're if if you're gonna be, you know, consuming adult beverages at midnight and you hire stripper, what do you think?
The odds are that something's gonna go wrong.
Here you've got these guys, I don't care what their race is, and I don't care what the race of the dancers are.
You got am I wrong so far, Don?
See?
Shocked you.
You've got the you've got the ingredients here for trouble.
What do you think's gonna happen when you've got underage guys, don't care their race, consuming adult beverages, hiring a couple of women to come over and basically undress in front of them.
And everybody's looking past that as uh as the root cause of this circumstance, and they're going to the age-old it's a clash of races, and it's not about that at all.
It's about the fact that nobody's got any sense when it comes to these kinds of circumstances, and this kind of trouble is to be expected, therefore.
A man, a legend, a way of life.
It's open line Friday.
No rush ball having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
FDA says there's no squaw.
Zilt zero nada.
Not a shred of medicinal value to the evil weed marijuana.
Now, this is uh this is gonna be a setback to the long-haired maggot infested dope smoking crowd.
Uh particularly what we're gonna do about states like Oregon, I think Oregon has legalized uh uh medical marijuana, have but they have they not, and the FDA says there is no medical benefit to it.
Who who wins in this?
By the way, we now know that hurtful speech has been banned by the Ninth Circuit.
You can't hurt anybody when you say anything.
And that really, folks, do you understand how that's gonna shut everybody up if this spreads?
I mean, it's gonna shut everybody.
You can't say it offend me.
You have a feeling you may not even be talking to somebody and they hear you say, You can't say that.
Shut up.
You know, people too weak and too spineless to not even be able to overlook it.
I mean, you want to let somebody have that kind of power over you to offend you, you go right ahead.
But in the meantime, I don't know if you knew this or not.
The California Supreme Court, this is not the Ninth Circus, California Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that writers have the right to talk dirty and make lewd comments, and therefore hurt people's feelings and offend them.
If they are creating a television situation comedy, they don't have to worry about being sued.
The court said that uh writers of the hit TV series Friends did not create a hostile work environment or sexually harass a woman who worked for them by transcribing their raucous work sessions creating programs.
A case was closely watched in Hollywood where several leading writers and civil liberties lawyers said the suit threatened to undermine freedom of speech and the creative process.
A spokesman for Warner Brothers TV, named as a defendant, hailed the ruling, saying, now we can continue doing what we do best.
Writing, producing hit TV shows, cussing, making all kinds of despicable, deceitful remarks.
I don't care who hears them, and nobody can do anything to us about it.
Uh the unanimous ruling by the uh who safe H.R. Well, yeah, we're safe because we're do see you people can't come after me for hurtful speech because I am creating in the process.
The difference here, sex talk, offensive talk when you're creating art, writing at TV's.
It doesn't matter who you offend.
Andre Serrano knows this.
Um so does the the person who put elephant dung on the uh on the Virgin Mary at a Brooklyn Museum.
No, if you if you if you offend somebody in the process of uh being creative, which of course we are here on the EIB network, so you know, I'm immune, but if you put on a Yeah, you're safe and it controlled because you all are part of the creative process.
Absolutely right.
Everybody working on this program is safe.
That means I can't be sued for sexual harassment, I can't be sued for anything based on this ruling in California.
I know this ruling California is California, but uh it's a it's precedent out there.
So all of us in the creative process, we have free reign to make you mad to hurt your feelings and offend you to you die.
And you can't do anything about it.
But if you're just an average schmall running around in school someplace wearing a harmless little t-shirt, you're in trouble.
According to the U.S. Ninth Circus.
All right, to the phones, Joe in Dearborn Heights, Michigan.
I'm glad you called, sir.
You're up first today.
Uh Superfy Rush, it does matter who wins the house in 2006.
I've seen several impeached bush signs on uh carry.
That's that's absolutely right.
I I what I I was being a little flippant there in terms of think you're a bit facetious a little bit.
Yeah, yeah, facetious because in terms of policy, what's it gonna matter?
Right, you're correct.
I would be looking of course it matters tax cuts and uh being made permanent.
Well, I worried they'll tie his hands as far as the war on terror and tax cuts.
Yeah, absolutely.
Definitely.
Well, tie his hands, try to kick him out of office.
Exactly.
That's uh that's uh that tie his hands would be the first thing.
Uh the whole process would create No, you're you're absolutely right.
You caught me there.
I was trying to be too facetious, uh too clever by half.
Well, we're trying to get rid of Debbie Snap and Al and uh Governor Grant home here in Michigan.
We'll we'll try real hard.
Well, you know, now that's interesting you bring that up.
Governor Grantholm, remember when she was uh first elected?
Uh yes, she was attorney general.
Yeah, the nation was swooning.
George Will and wrote a column.
We've got to get rid of this stupid constitutional requirement that says you have to be born in this country to be president.
Jennifer Granholm, rising star, she's not that popular anymore, is she?
No, she's not.
No, she's not.
Yeah.
Uh the the economy here in Michigan really sucks.
Uh partially due to the auto industry, but uh her spending and stuff is really attacking.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I just don't think it's right.
When the Democrats start talking about their saviors, it's uh it's Obama Barack.
Uh sorry, Bar uh Barack Obama.
Uh I don't hear her name mentioned much anymore.
Boy, she but she well her name was mentioned shortly after he elected and gave her inaugural speech.
The reason is, folks, it's not that often that you have a an attractive female Democrat win office, and she is one, uh, at least by comparative standards.
Uh I know, I just mentioned that.
And and yeah, they want George Will wrote a piece that they need to change the constitution so pe she's born in Canada so that people not born here can actually run for president.
And some people said that about Schwarzman.
By the way, Schwarzenegger is pulling ahead in uh in the polling data out in California for uh of course you think yeah, you're wrong.
Of course you think he's done because you're reading the wrong things.
Uh Jeff in St. Louis, I'm glad you called.
Welcome to Open Line Friday.
Hi.
Hi, Rex Mega Missouri Dittoes.
Thank you, sir.
Just wanted to uh let you know I was perusing the opposite opposition media today and uh found on CNN.com a funny video clip uh titled Reagan Knew How to Hush Hecklers.
And it then shows uh the uh uh the Chinese heckler who uh you know with with b with Bush and Hugh, and then it shows a couple clips of uh Clinton.
Wait a second.
Wait a minute, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold it just a we gotta get our terms right.
That wasn't a heckler, it's a Chinese freedom fighter.
Thank you for that.
Well, she is.
That's exactly who she was, and the media's not treating her that way.
The media's treating her as an absolute reprobate and human debris.
They ought to be treating her like they treat Cindy Sheehan for crying out loud.
Oh, no, no, no, you don't diss a communist in the United States, not to the big media.
Well, what was your point?
Well, the the point was it shows this uh video clip and it shows Reagan how Reagan would hush hecklers and uh showed just a quick clip and uh his clip or his comment was just to shut up to the heckler.
And I thought that was pretty funny.
Well, it is.
Reagan was great.
He also had another tactic, and that is he pretended he couldn't hear him.
Um and he couldn't.
He did have a hearing problem, he wore hearing aids.
Uh that that was his trick with Sam Donaldson.
Yeah, he got a question he didn't want to answer.
Sorry, I didn't quite hear that.
And Donaldson would shouted even louder, and Bush uh Reagan act like he couldn't hear it.
Uh but the problem yesterday was that that uh it was who that was being heckled.
And uh uh you know who was reading his speech off a teleprompter, who can't sit there.
He's not gonna he's not gonna even react other than to stop.
I'm sure he was stunned.
Uh we got some audio sound bites on this.
I predicted this yesterday, folks.
I basically said that the Chinese, they murder, they kill 8,000 political prisoners a year in China.
And the media is not interested at all in who this woman is and what her cause is and why she would show up and say something like that.
They are just obsessed with the fact that she has destroyed this visit, because the Chinese are so interested in saving face.
And for this woman to be allowed in, how could Bush allow this?
I predicted it.
We have a montage of the drive-by media in an uproar.
Here it is.
The Chinese are very, very concerned about appearances and protocol.
And you've heard the term faith.
The fact that the Bush administration would uh enable this thing to happen is a huge loss of face to the president of China.
The Chinese are saying, wait a minute.
George Bush and his campaign people were able to control the crowd at every event.
How come they couldn't do it for our guy?
It's all about face.
You need national leaders in the countries you're trying to change.
You need national leaders to be able to make the changes you want them to make without losing face.
The Chinese uh obviously worry about face.
Okay, here we go.
So the drive-by media's got got the talking point, the wizard behind the uh behind the curtain.
Saving face is the is the mantra.
Now, in a political sense, this poor woman did uh her cause backfired.
Uh this was this is the wrong way to do this because this is gonna it's just like the media demanding that Bush fire Rumsfeld or that Rumsfeld quit.
This woman showing up, your days are numbered, Communist Party rules numbered free the fool on gun.
This uh the probably what's gonna happen is they're gonna start rounding up even more of them over there.
Uh and and torturing them.
Uh uh and the uh as a result of what?
What?
Oh, yeah, activists and f the fool on gong in the country in the U.S. have been beaten as well, too.
But but the uh bottom line is that, you know, it it's it's an interesting it it means because here comes who?
And he's in the United States, and who gets to see what happens in the United States?
He's to see what happened in a free society.
Well, that's the last thing who wants is that he's a he's a really hardline communist, folks, despite the love and adoration, and these guys, they can put on a suit and tie and look normal like everybody else.
You let them go back home, put on their Mao suits, and they they they get into character and you and they're they're who they are.
They're running around and looking at Dung Xiaoping.
Uh, who was also portrayed as a cute, cuddly little guy.
Uh the He likes cowboy hats, yes, dung lucked cowboy hats.
Uh uh D E N G, by the way, and I'm not this that's his actual name for those of you in uh in Rio Linda.
Uh but these guys are really hardliners, and and and so he he got a dose of what Bush was talking about.
You need to open up your society.
Well, this guy's no way gonna open up his society and open himself up to this kind of thing.
So it's a shame.
But the other side of this is where's the media trying to find out who this woman is and what her cause is.
This man, this man uh who is as the leader of the country is responsible for more political prisoners and murders and deaths every year.
I mean, it t to even put George Bush in the same category as absurd, but Cindy Sheehan has.
George Bush a terrorist, George Bush the murderer, and of course, Cindy Sheehan celebrated.
Cindy Sheehan's cause was amplified.
She was made a great hero and said she should even run for Congress as a Democrat.
The left totally adopted her.
George Bush is a saint compared to any Chinese leader.
And yet the media scoff at this woman.
The media get mad at this woman, they get mad at Bush.
How dare this?
They're not interested in her cause at all.
And these are liberals, and they supposedly care about human rights, and they care about murder and torture, Abu Grab, Club Gitmo.
They couldn't care less about it, folks.
The bottom line is they don't care about any of that.
They just want you to think they've got giant big hearts.
Fact is it's all a tool to go out and get Bush.
If they were consistent, if they were honest, this woman would be the subject of investigative reports from now to the end of next week on who she is, how she dared get in there, why did she do it?
What kind of courage must she have to have done this?
We'd get stories like that about Cindy Sheehan.
We'd find out about does this woman have any children?
Have they been subjugated?
Have they been tortured?
We're not going to learn any of that from the drive-by media because they hate her and they hate Bush for allowing it to happen because the Chinese lost face.
I now want to offer you evidence uh that there are some of the drive-by media who see no difference in the policies of the Chicoms and uh George W. Bush.
Here's Jack Cafferty, the curmudgeon pundit commentator on the situation room with Wolf Blitzer on CNN last night.
Wolf, how hypocritical can you get?
There's President Bush lecturing the President of China about human rights.
Now, granted, China has a very long way to go in granting freedom to its citizens.
But who's President Bush to lecture anybody about human rights?
Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, the Patriot Act, prisoners being sent to other countries for interrogation, allegations of torture, enemy combatants being held indefinitely without being charged and being given access to a lawyer, wiretapping Americans' telephones without a warrant, in clear violation of the law that says you have to have one.
What's that old line from the Bible?
Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
All right.
So much of that is just factually incorrect.
Call the Patriot Act uh a human rights violation.
Hey, go you better go get the Democrats that voted for it and round them up too, Jack.
And Jack, go just go to China try to say what you just said.
Just go there and try to say what you just said about the Chinese government, Jack, and the screen will go black and it'll come to their studio and nobody will ever see you again.
Now, as to this business of prisoners being sent to other countries for interrogation.
I have a story from the New York Times.
From yesterday, I have it here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers, the European Union's anti-terrorism chief.
Told a hearing on Thursday that he had not been able to prove that secret CIA prisons existed in Europe.
There's no proof.
We've heard all kinds of allegations.
But it doesn't appear to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
This guy's name is uh Zhi DeVry.
Mr. DeVrie came under criticism from some legislators who called the hearing a whitewash.
Uh one of the uh uh women, Kathleen Whittenweg, uh Dutch member of Parliament from the from the Green Party said, I'm a I'm a pull we keep calling to uphold human rights while pretending that these rendition centers don't exist and doing nothing about it.
Nope, there's no proof that they exist.
Yep, yep, Jack Cafferty's on it.
There's no question they exist, and here we're torturing people in these things.
Wiretapping Americans' phones without a warrant.
This is a perpetuation of a contemptible lie.
It is uh former FISA judges have even said that the policy is totally legal and that Bush has done nothing different than the previous president.
But that's that's beside the point.
The point is, note how easy it is.
For Jack Cafferty uh and a lot of others in the drive-by media.
By the way, I think this uh no proof of secret CIA prisons belongs in the drive-by media morgue.
We've established a drive-by media morgue at Rush Limbaugh.com.
We're gonna keep adding to it as the drive-by media keeps driving by, ripping things to shreds, all for naught, all falsely, countless examples.
The idea that you could in this in in the same breath draw a comparison between George W. Bush and a communist regime is patently absurd.
But there are those who hold the view because it's it's rooted and founded in some sort of inexplicable rage and hatred.
Bretton Atlanta, I'm glad you uh waited.
You're on open line Friday.
Hi.
Thanks, Rush.
Um, you know, there's been a lot of talk about the obscene amounts of money associated with Exxon Mobil, and one of the things that no one's really talked about and that I'm really bothered about is the obscene amounts of money that ExxonMobil has paid to the government in 23 billion dollars worth of taxes.
Uh that's just way too much money anyone should ever have to pay to the government.
Uh what was their profit?
Their profit, well, their net income was $36 billion.
Which their total revenue was $340 billion, so their profit margin was 10%.
But I don't I don't care how much money, how much revenue they have.
They shouldn't no one should ever have to pay that much money to the government.
Uh well, they don't.
You do.
The price is added to your gasoline at the pump.
That's the dirty little secret.
Corporations don't pay taxes.
They may send some money to the government.
But all of us are paying it's just it's just more evidence if you're really, really mad at the cost of gasoline.
Do not exempt the government because they are the number one gougers.
It's like Lee Raymond said the other day, somebody asked him, what about what about your what about your 400 million dollar return?
What about he says, you know, I remember back in the 80s, oil price was $10 a barrel.
I don't remember anybody in Washington calling me up and saying, Hey, can we help you through this rough spot?
Back after this.
Our friend Scott Ott at Scrappleface has answered the question.
Uh well, a spokesman for the uh US oil industry has answered the question of why uh gasine is so expensive.
It's very simple.
▲
Export Selection