All Episodes
Previous Next
May 8, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:23
May 8, 2006, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And greetings to youth real seekers, music lovers all across the fruited plan, Rush Limbaugh from Los Angeles today and tomorrow, here on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the Rush Limbaugh program, a program that meets and surpasses all audience expectations on a daily basis.
Our telephone number, if you want to be on the program today, 800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
Now, where we were where we were discussing what we were discussing before I rudely interrupted myself after being told that I had forgotten a commercial break in the last hour.
We fixed all that, and I apologize for that, folks.
A clock's in a strange place here.
I mean, there's a reason for this.
I'm not blaming anybody, and I'm not blaming the clock.
I'm just saying it's in a strange place.
It's uh but the mistake has been made and it won't be made again.
You'll learn from your mistakes, uh, as I will demonstrate in this hour that I have.
Now we're talking about Republicans, and I was I was gonna tell you about Ken Blackwell in Ohio.
He runt won the Republican primary uh running for governor there, and he did it running as a conservative.
And I don't understand why Republicans in Washington are so afraid to do the same thing when it's what got them there.
There's an interesting story today by Jim Rutenberg, who is at the New York Times.
I have to tell you, I have every time I've had an encounter with Jim Rutenberg, uh, it's it's been uh accurate, it's been fair, uh, and I've I've never found Rutenberg to write something that uh in my case uh was not what I had told him, uh and he's not taken me out of context.
So I I consider him to be a pretty up uh upstanding fair guy, and he's got a story today, Rove using threat of loss to stir GOP.
This is all about Rove, and uh now that he's back in his primary position in the White House, how he's gonna go out and try to unite conservatives, the conservative base uh in order to win the elections this November.
Now, Rutenberg starts the story this way.
To anybody who doubts the stakes for the White House in this year's midterm congressional elections, consider that Representative John Conyers of Michigan, the Democrat, would become chairman of the Judiciary Committee if his party recaptured the House, and and he has called for an inquiry uh into the possible impeachment of President Bush over the war in Iraq.
Nancy Pelosi is saying the same thing that they're gonna start investigation.
Well, we don't know if we're gonna get to impeachment, we're certainly going to start investigations.
They're gonna look into the Cheney energy uh uh committee he put together in the first year of the Bush administration.
Two courts have already said there's nothing illegal about what Cheney or the administration did.
They can bring any expert they want in to have at the executive branch to discuss policy.
It happens frequently.
And it's typical of Democrats to be mad that they would bring in energy experts to talk about energy.
Democrats want you to bring in a bunch of politicians and people that don't have the slightest bit of understanding about any business in order to fix it.
Uh so they brought in the uh, and it was a secret meeting, and that the Democrats tried to make hay out of that.
So they're gonna investigate that again and and do a number of other things.
So Rove is gonna go out there and try to unite the base, and here is what Rutenberg's story says are gonna be the issues.
Rove has focused in particular on uniting the conservative base behind the administration's proposals to overhaul immigration, which include guest worker provisions that conservatives despise, the Iraq war, which has driven Bush's poll number sharply down, and the Medicare prescription drug program, which administration says will cost 872 billion dollars from 2006 to 2014, and which the president backed enthusiastically.
Now, I rate I read this, and I don't know how anybody could unite the conservative base on these three issues.
To get the conservative base to go along with the White House immigration program, what are they not getting in there?
What are the uh uh the Medicare prescription drug program going to unite the conservative base on that?
I mean, it may end up being a good program in the sense that uh the people that sign up for it like it, uh, much more than and find it easy.
I mean, it does introduce market reforms into an entitlement program, and that's okay.
Um and the Iraq war, that that that that's the one in here that I think people are willing to rally to the president on, especially the conservative base side, because I think the News there, if they could just get it out, is ultimately better than it is worse.
But overhauling immigration, whatever happened to conservatives, is why I said the president does not lead a conservative movement.
He never has.
I'm not being critical.
I'm just pointing it out.
He's he's a conservative on some things, but he's not an actual, he doesn't look at himself as leading a movement.
Uh but whenever conservatism is tried, Ken Blackwell in Ohio is doing uh did extremely well.
Lynn Swan running for the uh governorship, Pennsylvania.
He's gonna he's running as a conservative.
Um, both of them uh, you know, African Americans to boot.
Uh what are the Republicans doing in response to this?
Well, the Washington Times has a story, Donald Lambro today, and the headline says it all, GOP embraces local issues uh for 2006 elections.
This is almost as akin to saying they're gonna already blowing off the approach that uh that Carl Rove wants to take.
Ed Petrew, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee says, we're content to have a Democrats talk about the national atmosphere.
We're focused on local issues.
Winning on local issues.
That's going to be the key to Republican success in November, Mr. Nick said.
Brian Nick, who is the chief spokesman for the National Republican senatorial committee.
He added that Elizabeth Dole, the chairman of that committee, is definitely stressing to the candidates to uh run on local issues.
That means they're running away from the White House.
And that's I can understand it, but I'll tell you that may not be the wisest thing to do.
Uh it may actually want to stand with the president if they really want to fire up the conservative base.
Now they're making it tough to do this because it's it's the immigration bill, particularly this this having this guest worker program is uh is problematic.
However, uh, if you if you it's frustrating if you just look at the past and uh even the Republican majority that's there today, the vast you know, we hear about these liberal moderate Republicans and how powerful that they wouldn't be in the majority, and they wouldn't even have a chance to to to make their mischief were it not for conservative Republicans running either on national or local issues in their districts and winning, but they ran on conservatism, and the big problem that they're all having with the base is that once they got there they abandoned it.
Uh they act afraid of it.
It's it's this part of the typical Washington culture.
Now, on the on the other side of this, here came this big story yesterday in the Washington Post.
Confident Democrats lay out agenda.
Democratic leaders increasingly confident they will seize control of the House in November, laying plans for a legislative blitz during their first week in power that would raise the minimum wage.
I mean, the whole point of this story, can you ever imagine a story like this?
If the Democrats were in the majority, and the Republicans thought they were going to win it.
I mean, there would never be this kind of story.
They wouldn't, if if the Republicans did have such an agenda, um, I mean they well, I know they did with the contract with America, but nobody thought that Republicans are gonna win 54 seats and take control of the House in the 1994 elections.
But ever since then, uh drive-by media has been obsessed with one thing, and that's when the Democrats are gonna get back in power.
So they already think they are.
It's just a it's just a matter of time.
We just gotta let the clock tick and the calendar run until we get to the elections in November.
We got this story increasingly confident they will seize control, laying plans for a legislative blitz, their first week in power.
Here's the blitz.
They're gonna raise the minimum wage.
They're gonna roll back parts of the Republican prescription drug law.
They're gonna implement homeland security measures.
What homeland security measures?
I didn't know they supported any.
I thought they were trying to tear down whatever it is that we're trying to do there.
And they're gonna reinstate lapsed budget deficit controls.
Nancy Pelosi said in an interview last week that a Democratic House would launch a series of investigations of the Bush administration, beginning with the White House first-term energy task force, probably including the use of intelligence in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq.
They want to convince people Bush knew that there were no weapons, and that he lied.
And if they run the committees, they can bring whatever witnesses up they want.
They can write whatever reports they want, and they can come up with that conclusion if they want to.
Now, Pelosi denied the Republicans' uh uh allegations that a Democratic House would move quickly to impeach President Bush, but she said of the planned investigations, you never know where it leads.
That's all they want to do.
Payback time.
They can't get over what happened to Clinton, so they've been wanting to pay back, and especially after Florida 2000 and the aftermath there.
Uh uh so i i in recent days, Democratic confidence has been buoyed by a series of polls indicating not only is Bush growing increasingly unpopular, so are Republicans in Congress.
So are Democrats in Congress.
Democrats, Republicans, whoever in Congress, approval numbers are much lower than even Bush's.
But let's go to this companion story.
Nancy Pelosi talking a tough game about what would happen to Republicans in the Bush administration if Democrats take back the House in November.
She promised major investigations of the president and members of his administration, more money and homeland securities.
Really, they just their agenda is can sum it up, we're going to hate Bush even more.
We're going to spend all of our time hating Bush.
That's what we're going to do.
That's what our agenda is going to be.
But do they have a lock on this?
The results in Ohio, where Democrat pollsters brought back comparatively bad news makes people scratch their heads why the Democrats are talking tough.
Despite record spending for primaries, Democrats barely improved on primary numbers they had in the state back in 2002 for midterm elections.
Nationally, while approval numbers for Republicans edge down to the teens, Republican turnout has been surprisingly good.
And it now appears that several seats targeted by Democrats in Ohio, California, Texas, and Florida will not be in their column in November.
Pelosi's been talking a good game, but her party's numbers aren't holding up, said a Democratic leadership aide who's working behind the scenes to remove Pelosi after the midterm elections.
You don't hear about any of this in a drive-by media, but they're not happy with her.
She's mouthing off.
All of them are.
And dingy Harry's not doing that great either.
Mike DeWine's got an 11-point lead over his contender and Sherrod Brown in the race for the Senate there.
And if he maintains that lead and even builds on it, they're not going to pick up the seats in Ohio they think they're going to pick up.
Now, this is not to say the Republicans are doing anything great except the Republican base is turning out.
And the one thing the Democrats are not factoring, this could be a total repeat of 2002, because ever since the Wellstone Memorial, the whole Democratic Party every day has been conducting a Wellstone Memorial.
They are not inspiring.
They're not recommending themselves.
They're not successfully reaching out and making new Democrats.
That's why they need illegal immigrants and so forth.
Now, it's not to let Republicans off the hook.
It's just they're missing such an opportunity here.
If they would just put their conservative caps on and be conservative and govern that way and campaign on it, the Democrats wouldn't even have a prayer and wouldn't be talking about having one.
Back right after this.
Before we get back to the Nancy Pelosi soundbites, one little interesting story here.
This is a column by John McIntyre that I found out real clear politics.
And it's just the first two paragraphs are all that are necessary here to share with you.
Given the New York Times story today that Rove wants to unite the conservative base on the president's immigration plan, the Iraq war, and the Medicare drug benefit.
Ron Brownstein had an interesting article in the Los Angeles Times yesterday about how the 2006 elections could lay the playing field for a pivotal battleground states in 2008.
Brownstein correctly points out that Democrats are looking to the west, in particular the southwest, to put more states in play on the electoral map.
Of course, any handicapping and potential 08 battlefields will be seriously impacted by who the candidates are.
But as a general statement, Democrats are going to be looking to put the southwest states of Nevada, Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico into play.
These are all states that are modestly trending Democratic on the national level, even though President Bush was able to flip New Mexico in 2004, winning by 6,000 votes versus losing to Gore by 365 in 2000.
In Colorado, John Francois Carey narrowed the Bush win to five points from nine points in 2000.
In Nevada, he cut Gore's four-point loss to only two points, Kerry did.
The Kerry campaign gave up on Arizona in 2004.
He lost ground there compared to Gore.
But ever since Clinton's two-point win in 1996, Arizona is a state that directly Democrats definitely have on the radar, primarily because of the state's 25% And growing Hispanic population.
There it is.
I mean, not news to any of us, but just to confirm to you what illegal immigration is all about as far as the Democrats are concerned.
The state's 25% and growing Hispanic population.
And that's why they think Arizona is uh is is gonna be in place.
So uh I I don't I uh I'm having trouble understanding why the the White House thinks they're gonna be able to siphon off a number of Hispanic votes anywhere to upset the Democrat majority there, and the way to still the the the thinking the way to do it is to go about this amnesty program for uh uh it's it it boggles the mind.
Um anyway, to the phones, this is Aaron in Cocomo, Indiana.
Hi, Aaron, welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
Uh tremendous pleasure to talk to you again.
Thank you, sir.
I I'm at a loss here too.
I don't understand this uh strategy.
I'd sure like to know uh what happened to privatizing Social Security.
I'd like to know what happened to school vouchers.
Those are two huge issues for me.
It's issues that I voted for the president, I voted for my local congressman who's a Republican.
I've voted for him, they've campaigned on it every time, but they keep campaigning, but then they don't get it done, and now it seems like they've just kind of chucked that off to the side and they're not gonna mess with it.
And yeah, I mean Medicare, I don't I don't have a problem with the Medicare bill, but I'm not a senior citizen, and it's not you know anything I'm gonna get jazzed about.
The immigration bill, if you want to come up with a guest worker program or something like that, that's that's the second step.
First step is shut the border, and I think they're getting ahead of themselves on that one.
But uh I just can't understand what happened to the private privatizing social media.
Well, let me try let me try to explain it to you, because the president tried both, though.
Now the tax cuts being made permanent, I think the Republicans are are still gonna work on that, and that that would be uh wise, if not permanent, that some of them are gonna at least make capital gains and some other investment taxes are gonna be extended at least uh for two or three years.
Um as to this Social Security and vouchers, they did try.
Uh I think Social Security, they sold it the wrong way.
The key word in Social Security is security.
Uh and they they went out and sold it as uh as a ownership and and investment uh program.
A lot of people are worried and and and fearful of investments because they don't all turn out well.
And there's a large educational process to tell people we're look at the long-term history of the market, any starting point you want, and look at it years later, and you'll always see a net gain that's very large.
But um it the Democrats are able to exploit this by saying if the president wants to take away your security and put it at risk in the stock market, we're of course nothing but a bunch of evil rich Republicans are waiting to steal your money.
So it it's um uh they had high hopes for this, and I did too, frankly.
It's it turns out that they sold it the wrong way.
Vouchers, uh, you know, this is uh this is a one of these perplexing issues because one of the groups of people in this country that are just astoundingly pro-voucher uh are uh minorities.
Uh it is the one way that their kids have an access, a chance to some quality education.
Um and I think it uh looking for something that's new and something that's relevant rather than going back to things that they tried and lost, uh I think they should still make the claim that they're gonna keep trying for these things because it takes a while, uh, and you need a bigger majority to get votes uh to pass all these things.
So they they they I think they should focus on those things a little bit more than uh than they are appreciated.
Uh let's see, let me go to Lansing, Michigan next.
Uh Alex, I'm glad you called.
You're on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hi, Rush.
Thanks.
It's a privilege.
Um maybe not even a good question after your analysis on the midterms, but if you could put aside, you know, all the analysis, the media, not your own, but uh what kind of picture do you see in November?
I you know, because I go from day to day.
Yeah.
And uh I don't know.
Um well, I'll I'll tell you, I am I we were talking about this at dinner uh last night.
I am I am asked this question constantly because people do think that I uh am clairvoyant, able to see the future uh and predict these kind of things.
And uh I also think that people want to hear optimism because they get nothing but pessimism wherever they turn, even from Republicans.
And I you're probably like a lot of people.
Uh you're you're already You're hearing constantly about how the Democrats have already got it won.
And they're already telling us what the agenda they're going to do.
They're going to investigate Bush.
Republicans, some are saying, Yeah, boy, we could, if we're not careful, we can lose in those seats.
We can lose control.
It's going to be it's going to be desperate out there.
And I have uh a totally different take on this.
Uh I don't think the Republic Republicans are going to lose the House at all.
And I think they may even gain seats despite themselves.
One of the main reasons for this is I never get along and go along with the conventional wisdom.
It's always wrong.
I don't care if it's in sports, if it's in politics, it's in standard news.
The second thing is, folks, that Democrats, I don't care what the Republicans are doing, the Democrats are not giving anybody that already doesn't vote for them a reason to join their movement.
I got to take a quick time out.
I'll expand on this when we come back.
Stay with us.
America's anchor man, America's truth detector, and doctor of democracy all combined is one harmless, lovable little fuzzball here in Los Angeles today and tomorrow on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
About this 06 analysis, folks, this is not uh uh wishful thinking, phony optimism.
I've I've I've thought about this.
I have never bought into this notion that the Democrats are gonna win in uh in 06 just because it's 06, or because of the Iraq War or Bush's poll numbers.
Um every year you have to every since 1994, when the Republicans won the House.
Every two years, 96, 98, 2000, 2002, 2004, now in 2006, you can make book on it.
We're gonna get stories and we're gonna get polls about how the American people prefer the Democrats to run the economy, prefer the Democrats to run security, prefer the Democrats to run the war on terror.
It's absurd.
Because if that were true, John Kerry would be president today.
The Democrats would have taken the House back in 2000, 2002, 1998, when Clint.
You look at what happened when Clinton took over as president in 1993, from 1993 to when he left office in 2001, the Democrats had a tremendous loss of governorships, tremendous loss of seats in the House.
They started put some back, and they went back and forth controlling the Senate.
If it hadn't been for jumping Jim Jeffords, they wouldn't have controlled the Senate uh earlier in this uh in this century.
The idea that the country's clamoring for Democrats to run the show is absurd.
Because if they were, it would have happened already.
And they haven't even gotten close, folks.
Well, I mean, the last lake you'd say that they're seven, but seven, depending on how they fall, seven and fifteen seats uh short.
But I think you get affected by that.
It creates a conventional wisdom, and now the Democrats are trying to create a reality in advance.
Uh they're trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They're out there talking about what they're gonna do the first week they get their power back.
Um and they're even not afraid to use the word C is power when we seize power uh but if you look at the evidence, forget the polls, look at elections.
I just gave you details of what's going on in Ohio.
Uh and that's a state there's a Republican governor that's got a corruption problem and he's not happy.
The people there are not happy, but can Blackwell run uh one big in his primary as a conservative.
Um don't don't mind to this notion that the it's just automatic because as I say, since 1995, all we've been getting is stories about how the country prefers Democrats.
And you get polls and you get the Democrats saying, yep, but it's uh totally a matter of time, because they think this has just been a a temporary interruption in the natural order of things, which is Democrats running everything.
But they're not winning.
And they, I mean, Kerry lost by four million votes.
They called it a close election, Nat's eyelash.
BS.
It wasn't.
They run around and say, yeah, well, 55,000 votes swing in Ohio, it would have been a different story.
There wasn't a 55,000 vote swing.
I mean, if anything, yeah, you can you can construct a difference.
So don't be surprised if once again every expert and pollster on The left is talking to you and making you think that the Democrats have this big sweep coming.
Don't be surprised in November when it doesn't happen.
But I want to be very clear here.
I'm not saying that this is going to be the case because the Republicans are giving anybody great reason to vote for them either.
I always get this question about what's going to happen in 06.
And if it was a follow-up question.
I got it on a golf course yesterday.
I got it on a golf course Saturday.
I'm going to get it on the golf course this afternoon, I'm sure.
They said, Do you think Hillary can get the nomination?
Yes, I think Hillary can get the nomination.
Do you think she's going to win?
Well, anything's possible, but I don't think she will.
She's one of the most polarizing figures around.
Now, John Pedoritz is a columnist in the New York Post, got a big book out.
And of course, uh the the he's very smart, wants to sell a lot of copies, and he's probably going to because he's laying out the case here as a conservative how Hillary can win.
The left wants to hear that.
We don't want to hear that.
Uh so it's going to feed into this notion that she's just automatic, that the Hillary president is presidency is is something that we're entitled to.
But again, that's conventional wisdom as well.
We don't know for sure she's going to get the nomination, or we don't know who the Republican nominee is going to be.
Uh conventional wisdom there, it's going to be McCain.
But looks like Giuliani's starting to get serious.
Uh uh, may pull the trigger, starting to get serious about raising money.
Mitt Romney's a dark horse, a sleeper out there.
You have no clue what's going to happen.
We don't have a clue what's going to happen in 06.
Uh, and I don't I also don't believe these stories that the Bush White House is wandering aimlessly in the desert without any idea what to do and what to think and what to say and so forth.
Um there may be some people in the White House that way, but I don't think that they're as disengaged as this propaganda media is trying to persuade.
What's frustrating is that with the Democrats being who they are and finally opening up and showing everybody who they are and what they stand for.
Uh and and it uh the the Republicans have such an opportunity to contrast.
And the Republicans are so scared that they're gonna be associated with Bush that they're trying to go uh in in the the local in their campaigns or trying to out democrat Democrats in in certain ways.
Like this silly plan to give people a hundred bucks at the end of the summer as a rebate uh on on uh on gasoline prices.
Uh uh.
Just the wrong way to do it.
I think they can win despite themselves.
Uh because uh believe me, folks, I have I have a tremendous amount of faith of the people of this country, at least the people that vote and the people who pay attention.
And I understand human nature, and I'm telling you, there's not there's nothing even likable about the Democrats today.
There's not they don't have a charismatic figure.
They don't have somebody when they other than Clinton, but but Clinton is not running for anything, and he's he didn't help Kerry, may have hurt him.
You look at the candidates Clinton goes out and endorses, and it's it's it's not a happy picture.
So I just I don't I don't see them doing anything.
I mean, there may be all this disgust at Bush, but you let Hillary get the nomination in 08, or you let the Democrats continue to go nuts, and the Republican base showing up in great numbers still in Ohio, and that's what's interesting about the analysis coming out of there.
Um I think Republicans will show up and vote if for no other reason just to keep the Democrats from the reins of power in the war on terror and national security because they're making it plain they can't be trusted.
And that's gonna be an overriding issue, regardless what else is on the table.
Bill in Cincinnati, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Good afternoon, Professor Limbaugh.
Thank you, sir.
Uh I think you're right on target here.
Uh uh, as far as uh my philosophy is just a lot of doom and gloom from the left.
Uh I I don't know.
I know that the Republicans aren't given our base a big reason to vote uh for them right now, but I think uh there's a lot of conservative uh uh blue states out there.
And uh I'm here in Ohio.
Thank God uh, you know, Mr. Blackwell uh came through, and uh uh and I don't think it's just the Republicans gonna keep us in power, but I think some of the uh some of the uh you know common sense Democrats out there who can think for themselves.
I mean, they they have to realize the economy's good, they're making money too.
Um I don't think they feel guilty about it.
And uh we haven't had any attacks in this country since 911.
Well, yeah, but that that see that's something can always change.
Um that's that's one of these things, and if that happens, you know, then um uh Democrats wait till I go into action on if we get a hit again, and will you the Democrats will doom themselves, I guarantee you, with their reaction.
But you what did you say?
You said common sense Democrats.
I'm beginning to wonder um how many there are.
And I don't mean this to put down Democrats, but it's clear that the Democratic Party base, that and by this I mean I don't know how big it is, but this is what the Washington Democrats, elected Democrats are listening to.
The Washington Post is publishing op-eds by the obscure leaders of this fringe kook base.
Uh I don't know if that's alienating how many you know common sense Democrats there are.
I don't know how many how don't I don't know how many there are.
I don't when I listen to Democrats speak, they all sound like kooks to me.
They all sound like this kook base fringe.
And I I'm uh I'm sure there are some out there who are disgusted, but you never hear from them, so they could be a sort of a silent minority out there.
But you mentioned the economy.
Now that's an interesting thing, too.
Here in the New York Times, I have a story by David Leonhart, uh, and it's from it's from yesterday.
For Bush, the economy is a glass half empty.
Even as gas prices uh top three dollars a gallon in much of the country, President Bush spent a good part of last week trying to tie himself and his party to the economy.
He said in a speech in Washington, the economy's powerful, productive, prosperous, and we intend to keep it that way.
Now listen to this next paragraph.
It was in some ways an odd remark.
The president vowing to stay the course at a time when Americans say they're unhappy with his handling of the economy as they are with his performance on everything else.
Mr. Bush's cheerleading also had a clear logic.
Polls show that Americans are quite satisfied with today's overall economy, but gas prices and interest rates and health care costs may be rising, and so people aren't that confident that it is that good.
People have anxieties mostly about health care and the direction of the economy.
Still a gallop poll taken last month.
More people than not said their own financial situation was improving.
Just 10% of Americans were worried about losing their jobs in the next year, less than throughout most of the 80s or the 90s, with a Clinton boom.
So we've got people more confident and more secure.
But this same little sentence here, um uh their their own financial situations was improving, but they're not so confident about their neighbors.
Now, what's the common thread here?
You didn't see a report like this in the 90s when the economy was moving booming for Bill Clinton, the media marveled at Clinton and his economy and his rising polls, and they said it's all because the economy things are wonderful, and now the media scratching its head writing stories.
Why isn't Bush getting credit for this for this good economy?
Well, here's we all know the answer because it's not being reported as such.
In fact, it's even worse.
The broadcast networks, the drive-by media, are doing nothing if not trying to create panic over global warming, fuel prices, oil prices, and so forth.
NBC, ABC, CBS obsessed with gasoline and gas prices, and I rate consumers.
According to Brent Bosell's outfit, the media research center, the three networks aired a total of 183 stories about the horrors of gas prices between April 12th and May the 2nd.
Only four stories in the same time period covered the current low unemployment rate of 4.7%.
Well, voila.
There you have it.
The economy is doing great, as you point out.
People have to experience it themselves because there is no rah-rah coming from the drive-by media about it.
They've had nothing.
Six years, folks.
I mean, they may be losing their monopoly, but they still have power to influence six years of hammering this president, hammering the country, hammering global, hammering environmental destruction, doom and gloom, pessimism.
It has had an effect.
I gotta run, take a quick break.
We'll be back after this.
I know that.
I'm sending an email.
I'm everything's cool.
L. Rushbow in total control of the EIB network.
We're in Los Angeles.
We'll be here today.
And uh and tomorrow.
I'm out here primarily uh for a 60th anniversary uh celebration uh for the House Ear Institute.
They've been around 60 years helping people with hearing loss.
They helped me and they uh surgically uh performed the cochlear implant operation that restored my hearing.
Uh, and they invited me to come out for this, so I decided to come out on Friday and do a bunch of uh other stuff.
Some people haven't seen out here for a while.
Having a great time.
Uh here is a story about Old Mahmoud.
Now, this is this is interesting.
This these these despots, these little tin horn dictators, these these lunatic Islamo fascists.
The one thing they understand is their allies in this country, the Democratic Party and the drive-by media.
They understand can push the buttons, they know exactly how to play them.
Bin Laden or whoever is running Al Qaeda and knows how to play them.
Saddam knew how to play them and still does.
Iran's president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has written to George W. Bush proposing new solutions to their differences.
The letter will be sent via the Swiss embassy.
This is not an open letter.
He's not publishing this in some wacko newspapers.
Actually, I think Mahmoud probably sat down and may have even written it himself.
Or dictated it.
I don't know how they do this in Iran.
Do they have computers there yet?
They must if they got nukes.
So the letter will be sent via the Swiss embassy, which represents U.S. interests in Iran.
Mr. Ahmadinazyad proposes new solutions for getting out of international problems and the current fragile situation of the world, he said.
Reports say that it's the first letter from an Iranian president to a U.S. leader since the Iranian Revolution in 1979.
The Swiss have confirmed that they received a sealed A4-sized envelope addressed to President Bush, which they would deliver as soon as possible.
Did you see by the way I have a little brief departure?
They've come up with the forever stamp.
Because of these uh rising fuel costs, uh, you can go out, and the the I I know I understood this right.
It made no sense, but it made sense.
It's a bureaucracy stating it.
That uh you can go out and buy a forever uh forever stamp at the current price, 42 cents, and they said, and if you do it, if you buy it now, buy the forever stamp, you will never again pay a price increase until we raise the price.
And I I couldn't have misread that.
Forever stamp.
Government promising forever, but it's not forever.
At any rate, so I don't know if Mahmoud's gonna send it airmail, if uh the Swiss are gonna send it airmail.
FedEx, you don't know how it's gonna be sent.
But that's not the point.
Here's Mahmoud sending a letter to Bush and getting great PR out of it.
Oh, look at this.
Mahmood, he cares.
He wants a solution.
He's willing to talk to Bush.
Bush has no time for Mahmood.
Bush won't tell Bush just threatening to blow them up.
Bush is just threatening to strike them to stop them from becoming a genuine member of the nuclear club.
So when nothing happens, and Mahmoud has no intention for anything to happen.
Old Mahmood and his pals in this country and in the national and worldwide drive-by media will be able to portray President Bush and the United States as the bad guys, as the recalcitrant ones, the people that don't want an agreement, the people who are spoiling for war.
Because Mahmoud tried, he tried dialogue, he tried talking.
But Bush wasn't interested.
Smart move uh uh for Mahmood based on uh on who his uh his intended audience is.
Here's Stephen in Baltimore.
Steve, welcome to the EIB network.
Hello.
Great to speak with you, Russ.
It's funny because we agree on much more than we disagree on, but we draw different conclusions.
I think we agree that the American people are pretty smart.
But this culture of corruption thing really does have consequences.
You know, it's four and a half years since 9-11.
Republicans have had all sorts of time to reform the CIA.
But they put Porter Gauss in there, who, according to media reports, was caught up in this MZM scandal with uh uh Dusty Fago, who was a mid-level bureaucrat that all of a sudden rose to the third highest level of the CIA.
You know, after Katrina.
Uh it Katrina could have been a terrorist attack, and it took four or five days to get people basic needs like water.
You know what?
But that's not the CIA's problem.
That's that's look, I I have to take a commercial time out here.
I will continue this, Steve, in just a second.
Don't go away.
Stephen Baltimore culture of corruption is not going to play because the Democrats have their own culture of corruption, plus they have a culture of treason, and that can be exploited, as is uh their own culture of corruption.
They've even dropped that.
They're gonna go on to other directions.
▲
Export Selection