All Episodes
Previous Next
June 8, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:34
June 8, 2006, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
I tell you, folks, the drive-by media is and the libs.
And of course, what's the difference?
So predictable.
One of my major themes is playing out already and will soon be visible to one and all.
One of those themes is any good day for America and the U.S. military and the war effort is a bad day for liberalism, a bad day for the Democrats.
Greetings, my friends.
Hubba Hubba, great to have you on the EIB Network and the Rush Limbaugh program from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
A special welcome to those of you watching the program at rushlimbaugh.com on the DittoCam today.
Telephone number, if you want to be on the program 800-282-2882, and the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
Yes, what's good for America is bad for the American left.
What's good for America, bad for the Democratic Party.
Although the Libs do have some solace today, some idiot related to the Federal Reserve started opening his mouth and flapping his gums about core inflation and price support getting very, very, very delicate now.
And so the stock market has plunged.
It's been down as much, 150 points, now down 130 points, now below 11,000, I think around 10, 8,000.
NASDAQ was down about 50.
So there's still reason for the Democrats and the Libs to find happiness, even though the news out of Iraq is devastating to them.
Now, they're putting up a good stiff upper lip out there by acting like this is a big deal.
And they're praising the troops.
In fact, let me give you one example.
What is the audio sound?
Hang as toward the end there, Mike.
It's going to be number 13, Dingy Harry today on the Senate floor.
Let's listen to Dingy Harry and measure his attitude and tone here.
Today's mission that we're talking about and its successful outcome are a testament to the bravery, the skill, and the determination of those dedicated men and women on the front lines.
Stop the tape a minute.
Does it sound like Dingy Harry's reading this?
Does it sound like Dingy Harry is very happy about this?
I mean, it's risky to assign an attitude to someone's spoken words.
But, I mean, I know these people like back of my hand, every square inch of my glorious naked body.
And Dingy Harry sounds like he's delivering a eulogy here.
Zarkowi got a hard thing for me to say about any human being, but he got what he deserved.
Oh, geez.
It's a hard thing.
They just can't stand it.
And anyone who aligns themselves with him should know that they could wait a similar fate as long as they engage in terror.
On Good Morning America today, it was fascinating.
One of the ABC is, I guess, taking credit for breaking the story.
At any rate, one of their reporters, a guy named Bill Weir, reminded the audience that Zarkowi beheaded American Nicholas Berg.
Then they replayed Berg's left-wing dad, saying at the time that he had no desire for his son's killers to be killed.
So ABC early this morning is out there actually running a tape of Nick Berg's dad saying, I didn't want this guy killed.
I didn't want any retribution.
And Mr. Berg is all over television this morning.
Michael Berg is all over the place now ripping Bush.
You want to hear a little bit of that?
Let's start with audio soundbite number 10, Fox and Friends.
Nick Berg talking to, I'm sorry, Michael Berg talking to Edie Hill.
And she says he's the person who is despised by so many Iraqis for masterminding the massive killings of hundreds, thousands of people there.
So this is in essence.
I don't think that Zirkawi is himself responsible for the killings of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq.
Hundreds or thousands.
Hundreds or thousands.
He's the one that invaded this country.
George Bush is the one that destabilized it so that Zirkawi could get in, so that Zerkawi had a need to be able to do it.
I believe that the argument, of course, would be that the American forces went in there and that followed hundreds of thousands, certainly under Saddam Hussein, being tortured and killed.
In this case, Al-Zarqawi, as I stated, hundreds of people and thousands of people were killed because of the direct orders of Al-Zarqawi.
All right, so it gets even better.
Next question was from Brian Kilmead.
Did you read the New York Times Sunday?
You'll see the little killing fields that were exposed there.
I'm amazed that you don't feel, if you don't want to feel any relief, the person who beheaded your son is now dead.
How do you know he did?
Because George Bush told you he did.
He claimed he did.
He was spotted on video.
Because George Bush, who was lied to the American.
Mr. Berg, I know that you're very emotional.
There was video of it.
He was identified in the video.
Everything you see on television.
And next over to CNN's American Mourning with Soledad O'Brien to Michael Berg.
There's a theory that as they try and form some kind of government, that in fact it's going to be brutal, it's going to be bloody.
So one of the things you have to understand about all this, folks, is the prism or the lens through which the drive-by media, the Democrats look at this event today is no different.
The lens and the prism is the defeat of American forces in Iraq, the defeat of the Bush policy, the defeat of Bush politically.
Just because this event happens, and make no mistake about this, by the way, this is an event brought about by the United States military.
I have said countless times on this program, even got a couple of notes today from people thanking me for being optimistic while their impatience and pessimism was growing.
And they asked me, how do you do it?
And I said, it's easy.
We're the United States of America.
We don't lose unless we get sabotaged from within.
But we've got a commander-in-chief who is not going to lose in Iraq.
It's simply unacceptable to him.
And he doesn't care what all these other people out there are saying or doing about this particular issue.
He's standing firm in the concrete on his principles.
We don't lose, folks.
The United States military just doesn't lose.
It's depressing to see so many people attempting to sabotage the effort.
And that's how this prism, you have to understand all this coverage.
You wonder why there's no real happiness and celebration on the American left.
Look at the Tony Snow press briefing this morning.
It was typical.
It was unremarkable in that it was predictable.
Tony at one point got a little frustrated and say, why are you guys so hell-bent on us getting out of Iraq?
This commander-in-chief is not going to accept anything other than victory.
This commander-in-chief is not going to lose in Iraq.
That's something that is so foreign to these people.
You have to understand the drive-by media, the Democrats have already chalked this up as a loss based on Bush's approval numbers and their giant electoral success in the primaries on Tuesday.
I mean, they're in a different world here, folks.
The template isn't going to change.
The prism, the lens isn't going to change.
And that's Democrats.
Well, this was good.
Yeah, it's a very fine effort.
We're very happy to see.
But it's not going to stop the terrorism.
And it just means, I mean, there were a lot of questions today, and it's being backed up by Jack Murtha.
Okay, so this ought to mean we can get out there, get out of there a lot sooner because we got the bad guy.
No, let's get out of there.
It's just Going to frustrate you to no end if you get caught up in it rather than understand a prison.
So, anyway, back to the question from Solonette O'Brien to Michael Berg.
Now, there's a theory that as they try and form some kind of government, that in fact it's going to be brutal, it's going to be bloody, there's going to be loss.
See, here comes the negativism.
They're going to retaliate.
Oh, wow.
This is, by the way, we formed or they formed the government in Iraq and announced it today, the very day the number one terrorist trying to stop it was killed.
I'm going to tell you something, folks.
That's karma.
Anyway, here's Berg's response to all this.
Saddam Hussein didn't pull the trigger, didn't commit the rapes.
Neither did George Bush, but both men are responsible for them under their reigns of terror.
I don't buy that.
Iraq did not have al-Qaeda in it.
Al-Qaeda supposedly killed my son.
Under Saddam Hussein, no al-Qaeda.
Under George Bush, Al-Qaeda.
Under Saddam Hussein, relative stability.
Under George Bush, instability.
Under Saddam Hussein, about 30,000 deaths a year.
Under George Bush, about 50,000 deaths a year.
I don't get it.
Why is it better to have George Bush be the king of Iraq rather than Saddam Hussein?
All right.
Now, some of you are saying, Rush, come on, the man lost his son over there.
Yeah, but he's not inserted himself in the political process and as such, being used by the media to advance an agenda item, and therefore he's fair game.
A quick timeout.
We will continue right after this on this glorious day of the EIB networks.
Stay with us.
And welcome back, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
America's real anchor man, reaching the heartland, the people who make this country work via the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Hey, let's go back to November 30th, 2005, Latrobe, Pennsylvania.
Jack Murtha held a press conference.
Hey, Jack, you think Zarkawi thinks the American military is broken this morning?
We got real problems.
The army is broken.
The equipment is worn out.
We got a $50 billion backlog of equipment which needs to be repaired.
Yeah, really.
Jack, you did your best out there to break everybody's will, but I guess it didn't work.
I know that Zarkawi is now room temperature, pictures to prove it.
His buddies that died with him and those who remain as supporters think the military is broke.
And then on March 7th of this year on hardball with Chris Matthews, Murtha said this.
When the military gets stretched too thin like it is, the problem is that we can't scare anybody.
In other words, when Cheney makes a threat like that, it falls on deaf ears because they know darn well we couldn't accept it.
But the big thing is, as much money as we spend on intelligence, we don't know where the targets are.
We don't know exactly what we need to do.
So there's no use even talking about a military strike.
Jack, you think Zarkawi and his deceased buddies and remaining supporters think we're unable to find out where they are?
Hey, Jack, do you think Zarkawi and his dead compatriots and his remaining supporters think we don't have any intelligence?
And it's all a waste of time.
We don't know where the targets are.
We don't know exactly even what we need to do, Jack.
You still think that's true, Jack?
Hmm?
Murtha was on television today praising the effort.
Give him credit for that.
Major victory, blah, blah, blah.
What else is he going to say today?
Give him till tomorrow or tonight, maybe even.
But after even praising the effort and the mission, he said, now this just proved.
We can get out of there now.
I mean, get out of six months.
We can do it.
We can get out of there now.
Get out of there.
I mean, it's a civil war.
We're never going to win this thing.
Murtha said today.
We're never going to win this thing.
We can't win this thing.
And that's what I mean.
And this is why a Democratic Party today and all their supporters are simply untrustworthy.
We cannot trust them with the defense of this country or this nation's national security.
They will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory because it is policy for them.
They are so blinded with hate and rage for George W. Bush that they can't intimidate him on this issue.
They are just beside themselves.
The worst thing that could happen to them happened today, and that is a successful mission by the best trained, the best equipped, and the best military force the world has ever known, the United States military.
And these people are not happy about it, and they're doing their best to cover that up, but it won't be long before they're unable to do so.
I am waiting, and I'm going to make a prediction to you people.
It won't be long before somebody in the drive-by media or the Democratic Party raises the specter of, was anyone tortured to get the information that led to the identity of the unsafe house, the whereabouts of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Mark my words, my friends, because that's in the template.
That's in the prism.
And they're all about destroying our effort via Abu Ghraib, via Club Gitmo, secret black ops prisons in Eastern Europe.
The question will come.
We got close to it today during Major Caldwell's briefing in Baghdad.
Here's an exchange between Cox newspaper reporter Larry Capolo and Caldwell.
You've referred a few times to intelligence from Zarkowi's network.
And I'm wondering on that, were those people who were under interrogation in custody or people who came forward from Zarkowi's network to describe them?
It would be inappropriate for me to talk about where the information actually came from and who provided it to the intelligence sources.
This is typical, too.
The media wants, so how did you find out?
Tell us.
We want to know so that we can prevent you from finding out again.
Tell us your secrets.
We demand to know.
People have a right to know, blah, Now, this question got pretty close.
I'm wondering, were those people, sources, were they under interrogation, in custody?
That's getting very close to, did you torture those poor people?
What we have since learned is that it was tipsters inside Zarkawi's own network and a number of others that gave us accurate intelligence.
Now, what does that mean?
Well, that means that they're not happy over there in the Zarkawi al-Qaeda network.
It means that they don't think they're winning.
If it's having fallout like this, it is clearly an indication of something that I have thought and many people have thought for the longest time that the tide has turned and that we are actually winning.
Now, I cannot divulge my sources.
Where have you heard this before?
But I honestly, I cannot divulge my sources.
But I talked to some people this morning who know in a position to know the intelligence here.
And one of the major things that apparently did happen here was that information from detainees, i.e. prisoners, did play a significant role.
And I hope that at some point the truth of that can be made official.
Because all we're hearing, of course, is horror stories about the humiliation going on in Abu Ghrab, the torture, the alleged goings on in Club Gitmo.
If indeed this, and I don't know, I don't, trust me, I don't question this.
I just cannot get close to identifying the people involved here.
But they made it clear that the Taine reporting has played a significant role here.
Also, how about this?
You know, the charge that the U.S. is alone, no effective coalition or cooperation in the area.
I mean, didn't that take a big hit today?
Multiple factors came together to make this possible.
There was, I mean, look at who was involved here, the Iraqis, the Jordanians, and a CIA targeting team.
Yes, a CIA targeting team all involved to bring this about.
Now, it was Jordan.
Jordan released Zarkawi from prison only to see 20 innocents of their own killed in Amman, Jordan.
And Jordanians were in on this as a result.
The Iraqis played a part.
You aren't seeing them yet, but there are pictures of Iraq.
Well, you might, I don't know.
I haven't seen them on TV.
You might have.
But there are still photographs of Iraqis celebrating, firing guns in the air, happy at the news that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has assumed room temperature.
So we have the Iraqis and we have the Jordanians and the CIA targeting team working between elements in that region and putting together the information, and it came up big.
I'm also told that that April 25th video of Zarkawi, who firing away, not knowing how to do it, he looked very weapons challenged in that video.
You might have seen that being played on TV today.
That played a role, but they wouldn't tell me how.
I said, what was it?
To give you an idea where he was.
We can't go any further than that.
But obviously, folks, there was a tremendous amount of successful intelligence, Congressman Murphy.
A successful military operation based on that intelligence, hitting the target with two bombs, two 500-pound bombs, a couple of F-16s, and wiping out a whole cadre of Zarkawa units.
The U.S. military did this.
This was not the result of the Democratic government of Iraq.
And what I mean by that is it's great that they're having a democracy, great that we're putting it together.
But the United States military is going to win this.
The United States military, if turned loose, like this, Katie bar the door.
In addition, ladies and gentlemen, we have to draw, I've read something about Andy McCarthy today, National Review Online, in which, and I want to expand on this because he didn't spend a whole lot of time on it, but it's enough of a mention to excite my fertile brain.
Talked about how eager the Jack Murthy's and the Democrats in Congress are to indict the Marines of Haditha without even knowing yet officially what they did.
And yet, we can't do anything to Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana.
So men and women in the Marine Corps have no benefit of the doubt.
They are already guilty.
They've got to be strung up, dried and quartered, or drawn and quartered.
Meanwhile, Congressman Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, why we've got to make sure that constitutional protections remain in place for him.
Quick timeout, my friends.
Don't go away.
Your host for life, making the complex understandable, utilizing talent on loan from God.
Happy to have you along, my friends, at 800-282-2882.
All right, I want you to hear these Tony Snowbites from the Daily Press gaggle this morning.
Normally the morning gaggle isn't TV.
They TV, the one that starts about now, 1230, but this was important.
Unidentified reporter, don't know who this guy was.
Says, the president has said security needs of the new government, going to be one of the prime topics for discussion.
No discussion at troop levels?
Surely there's going to be some discussion at troop levels, Tony.
Yeah, but you guys are all why are you so hell-bent on saying we're going to get out tomorrow or you know make a good news headline?
But the facts on the ground, we've got six additional dead guys out of the terror network, but there is still a significant problem here.
So I don't think, of course, there is going to be a discussion of the way ahead.
And there will be discussions.
If this happens, what happens here?
You've got to understand these questions.
It's the template.
It is a prism.
We've lost.
The press has already decided this.
The drive-by media has already decided it.
Whether we win or lose, we've lost.
And so we've got to get out of there.
Look at the press's poll numbers.
Look at all the deaths.
We've got to get out of there.
People do not even consider alternative views to the ones they have decided they want, folks.
As a human characteristic, you have to understand this about nothing alternative to what they believe or hope will happen affects them.
It's like a foreign language to them.
And so despite all the, well, this is further, we can get out now.
I mean, it says we've lost the war.
You'll note here that any administration's official speaking today, be it Snow or Rumsfeld, president, they're not doing victory dances out there because this is not the end of anything.
It's a groundbreaking and much-needed victory, not just for morale of the troops, but for the country at large.
Another reason the press, the drive-by media, are not happy about it.
Still a lot of work to do.
Here was this exchange, too.
You got to hear this.
Tony's just a fabulous job, I think, up there as the press secretary.
It is the best press secretary I can remember being up there in a long, long time.
Marlon Fitzwater was good for what he did.
This is just really good stuff.
Listen to this exchange.
A good colleague over there being help-bent to get troops out tomorrow.
But I think there are some polling evidence that suggests Americans are getting antsy to see some troop movements back in the day.
I understand that.
What I'm asking is how does the president view that?
I mean, you say that he's blind to that?
No, the president understands what the polls are, but he also understands what his obligations are as commander-in-chief.
And if the polling data is contrary to the national security interests, guess what?
National security interests win, period.
That's how he views it.
And so you can look at the poll data, and we do.
We've taken very cold and honest looks at the poll data.
But the one thing is Commander-in-Chief, he is not going to fail in Iraq.
He is not going to permit failure.
Period.
End of subject.
Subject closed.
Of course, it's not closed.
Why isn't the president listening to our poll numbers?
Those are our poll numbers, Tony.
We are producing those polls, and they say the American people want to see some movement on troop withdrawals.
It's all bogus.
It's all a result of the questions that are asked after the stories that are presented.
I went and took a gander today, folks, at some of the Kook blog websites on the left.
It's hilarious.
It's just, it's, oh, they are, it's.
It's fit to be tied.
You got to remember, too, that these are the people that the Democrats consider to be their new base.
One guy at Daily Cause, Chaos, however you pronounce it, I still don't know, and I frankly don't care, but I hate wasting time having to pronounce it both ways.
One of the bloggers there complained that using military force to kill Zircawi, quote, violates everything My America stands for.
It violates the rule of law.
It invokes the rule of force in what should be a criminal, not a military matter.
Another daily causer upset because he thought the news would benefit President Bush.
No doubt Karl Rove will have the sock puppet president acting as if he personally dropped the bomb that killed that jackass.
But other than a couple of photo ops of Bush looking cocky, it does nothing because two more tin-plated Zarkawis will pop up.
A third poster at Daily Cost suggested there was little difference between the top al-Qaeda terrorist and the leader of the free world.
He wrote, now that we're rid of one murderous tyrant, how about the removal of another one believed hiding in a safe house at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue?
These are actual Americans, folks, posting at what is said to be the most popular liberal blog in the country.
Went over to Democrat Underground, and the reaction to the death of Zarkawi was also negative there.
Democrat Underground poster said, convenient too, that this would happen now.
Guess we should just all forget about that Haditha mess.
The fact that we're approaching 2,500 dead, the fact that our economy is in big trouble.
So this whole thing, the timing was conspiratorial to take all the other bad news off the front page.
Another poster at the Democrat Underground said that killing the Al-Qaeda chief, there's not such a big deal.
He said, Zarkawi was a fringe group of al-Qaeda, definitely not responsible for the bulk of the insurgency and civil war now going on there.
Any gains that they hope to receive will be short-lived when reality strikes home.
So that's the Democrats in the quote-unquote Democrat heartland, wherever the hell that is, Blue State America.
And that's just a sample.
I mean, that's just an early sample of what's happening out there.
But it's not just there.
ABC News, the note today.
You've got to listen to this.
This is Mark Halperin and his crew that write this daily briefing on the events of the day, how they'll play out politically, who's going where, who's going to say what.
And these guys, they do everything they can to hide the fact that they're left to center, but they are.
Here's their post for today, the note, June 8th.
Zarkawi is dead.
A decent interval is passed.
The politics has begun.
The briefed facts so far, safe house, killed by air, macho American tracking ingenuity, body recovered, fully ID'd, video documentation, few or no civilian or U.S. collateral damage, letting the Iraqis announce it, simultaneous additions of the new government, could not be better politically, even if General Rove had directed the operation.
You are watching the rollout of a serious PR plan.
This is not a blog.
This is, well, it's a blog, but it's not the Kook fringe blog.
This is ABC News.
They're calling it a public relations plan.
They are calling this operation the rollout of a PR plan.
After the death of Zarkowi, after the mission, they're not saying that the killing of Zarkawi is the mission.
They're saying everything announcing it and thereafter is the PR plan.
Major 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue tick-tocking has already taken place, and it will continue unabated throughout the day.
Here are things the White House cannot totally control.
When will the first public poll with presidential job approval numbers come out?
If CNN and Fox have different numbers, how will the nation and the on-air talent deal with that?
When will be the first time that Dean Pelosi Reed speak out, starting the Rube Goldberg process that goes from Karl Rove's ears to Ken Melman's BlackBerry to Tracy Schmidt's keyboard, Jack Kingston's talking points to the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
That's all part of the PR campaign.
So what's going to Rove?
Rove will react to Dean Pelosi and Reed, and Rove will send out the talking points to Ken Melman at the RNC, then over to Tracy Smith, who is the information babe at the RNC, Jack Kingston, a congressman from Georgia, and then to the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies for final dissemination to America.
I'm getting blue in the face.
We don't get talking points from here, and I don't think we're even that liked right now in the Rove office of the White House.
To tell you the truth, Mark, speaking here to Mark Helperin at ABC's The Note, I don't think we're looked upon favorably in that shop right now for a host of reasons.
Yeah, but I know they are admitting that they at ABC don't reach America.
It's like this UN guy.
It's UN guys complaining that it's me and Fox News that define American attitudes.
And so here is ABC's The Note saying that without me, the White House can't get its message out.
Then how much violence will there be this week in Iraq?
The White House can't control that.
Watch how Democrats handle today's news, and if they regret sending that letter about Ambassador Khalizad canceling his Senate briefing appearance.
Khalizad, the ambassador in Iraq, he canceled a Senate briefing appearance.
Senate got all upset about it.
Now, will they handle that news, given the death of Zarqawi?
Republicans will be watching to see if the death...
See, let me sum all this up.
This is nothing more than the latest political event.
The drive-by media cannot stop looking at this through the prism of a political event.
What they don't get is that Bush doesn't.
He is serious about the war on terror.
If they haven't learned that, I don't know.
They may find fault with him in other areas.
They may think he's movable on other subjects, but not this.
He ignores the polls on this.
He doesn't react to the negative polls in Iraq.
This continues the mission.
Now, they would counter by saying, what do you mean Bush doesn't look at this as a political event?
Ever heard of Karl Rove?
Of course, every White House looks at this as a political event.
If you think that you don't know Bush, you think you do, but you don't.
Sure, he's got political people around him.
But to call all of this a PR issue or our PR campaign, PR plan, is it's part and parcel of what I have offered to you as an explanation for those of you who just can't figure these people in the mainstream media out.
They have gotten so caught up in their own polls, they believe the polls they do.
They believe the stories.
It's like they still can't get over what happened Tuesday.
There was no way Bill Bray was going to win.
They had all the polling data.
They had the RNC spending all that money.
They just couldn't believe it.
They believe their own PR.
They believe their own propaganda.
And they get flabbergasted and stunned when reality is always different from what their polling data suggests or what their own prognostications are.
And they just continue to resist reality as a means of trying to show they have the power to create it as they used to when they had their monopoly.
We'll be right back.
Stay with us.
Okay, let's see what we get.
And we go out there and sample the opinion of the people who make the country work.
The audience of this program will start with Renee in Hamilton, Ohio.
You're up first, and it's an honor.
It's great to have you with us.
Oh, thank you so much.
This is such a wonderful day.
I got to tell you, whenever, and I thought of this, Jack Martha, and you were so right to remind everybody that, well, him and John Kerry both wanted like six months to get out, and that was over six months ago.
And had we listened to them, we would not have this victory here today.
Martha's still just saying we should get out in six months.
Yeah.
And when they were showing the rubble, the people digging things out of the rubble where Zarkowi was killed, they showed a little blue teddy bear and some little children's shoes.
And I immediately thought of Murtha and how he accused our Marines of murdering in cold blood.
And I just figured his response was going to be something like, you know, now we're still targeting children deliberately in cold blood to take out Zarkowie.
Did you hear him say that, or you just thought of that?
Yeah, that was just going through my mind.
See, I was watching this.
You've got to give this time.
They're not that dumb, but they can't help themselves.
They'll have enough discipline to hold their fire on what they really think of all this for a day.
But just be patient out there.
It won't be long.
They'll start asking the questions, was anybody tortured?
When they learned that there was a detainee role played in this, when they learned that what I have learned, that detainees offered intelligence, meaning prisoners, wherever we're holding them, you mark my words.
Were they tortured in any way?
I mean, some of the other things, folks, that you can expect to hear from assorted liberals over the course of the remainder of the week.
Did we have to use violence?
Couldn't we have tried diplomacy?
Couldn't we have talked to Zarkowi?
This, of course, is the voice of the new castrati, as I call them, those who have been neutered and have no spine backbone or a couple other things.
What was the urgency?
Couldn't we have offered him a few carrots?
I mean, we could have talked to him.
Why do we have to do this so quickly?
Now the world is going to hate it.
The world's going to hate it even more.
Bush, it destroyed our image in the world.
Now we're killing people and putting on TV like we're happy about it.
Haven't we learned that violence begets violence?
I mean, if we had been mature, if we'd been mature enough to leave and cut and run, then that man, Zarkowi, would be alive today.
We'd be alive today.
Perhaps on the verge of rehabilitation.
And I'll tell you what we've done.
All we've done with this.
This is not a victory.
This does not advance our cause.
All we've done is create more tariffs.
They're going to flock from the world over.
I mean, you know what they're going to say.
And then some of them are going to be thinking, we would have gotten Zarkowi a year sooner if Kerry were president, or if we had listened to Biden, or if Democrats were in power, Zarkawi would have never been in Iraq, blah, blah, blah, blah.
You're going to hear themes, variations on all these themes in due course.
You are.
First reaction when they heard it at home was a lump in the throat.
I'm sure there's some exceptions to this, but the Democratic Party is just like the drive-by media.
They look at everything through the prism of politics, and the politics today is how do we defeat Bush, who's not even on the ballot.
I mean, it's ridiculous.
But nevertheless, probably when we captured Saddam, when we captured Saddam, oh, you know, there was a lump in their throat there.
Choking and breath cut off for a while in stunned shock and disappointment.
I'm sure that in many quarters of the American left today and in certain sectors of the Democratic Party, there was a, oh, damn.
Damn it.
Just when we were on a roll, we got Bush right where we want him.
We had a moral victory in California.
50.
We got a California governor nominee.
He's going to defeat Schwartz and oh my God, Branteh, damn it.
We'll be back in just a second.
One other quick point here before we have to go to break.
We're going to move on to the things after this, by the way, but we'll still take calls from you.
I know you want to weigh in on this.
This is something that the drive-by media, the American left, will miss totally.
This Zarkowi death today is not just a huge military victory, but it's a huge moral victory as well.
One of the most brutal and evil men on the face of the earth is dead.
That's a good thing all by itself, quite apart from its impact on the war effort.
But just in terms of the morality of this, evil has lost.
The bad guys have lost a big one here.
And in addition to whatever military significance it has, it is an amazing moral victory as well.
And don't forget that, because you're not going to hear very many people in the drive-by media talking about moral victories.
▲
Export Selection