All Episodes
Previous Next
June 12, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:10
June 12, 2006, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Good afternoon, friends, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversation.
Good morning, depending on where you are.
Obviously, the time zone matters.
It is the award-winning, one-of-a-kind, Rush Limbaugh program, providing show prep for the rest of the media that follows on a consistent daily basis.
800-282-2882.
If you would like to be on the program, the email address is rush at EIBnet.com.
Day 12 of Hurricane Season 2006 in the drive-by media can't stand it.
So much excitement.
A category one hurricane about to hit northwestern Florida and the Gulf Coast sometime tonight or tomorrow.
They got reporters everywhere getting wet, getting windblown, surfers in the ocean behind them.
Also have a plane crash in Tampa that just occurred.
I think a small plane crash just occurred in Tampa.
It is wicked weather.
I mean, there's no question about it, but it's get ready for wall-to-wall drive-by media coverage of this.
We've been waiting for this for 12 days and already got one on day 12, so it's not all quiet out there.
They've revised the track of the storm, by the way.
If you haven't been paying attention, the storm is going to cross Florida and then head out to sea, paralleling the East Coast, but well off no more.
Now it's going to hit South Georgia, southeastern Georgia, even the southern beaches of North Carolina before as a tropical depression or maybe a tropical storm as it departs on out to the Atlantic Ocean.
Also, if you're just joining us, Al-Qaeda has named a successor to Musab, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
His name is Abu Hamza al-Buhajir.
And I had a big laugh about this.
I find it just humorous as can be that Al-Qaeda plays the drive-by media like a strativarius.
It got a successor.
Would they have a convention?
They have a convention?
Do they have confirmation hearings?
How do they come up with this new successor, this whatever, to Zarkawi?
It's an attempt here to westernize Al-Qaeda and make it appear as though that they do things in a democratic fashion.
They appoint leaders just like we do.
There might have even been an election, for all we know.
And we might also, ladies and gentlemen, you never know the excitement with which this new successor has been greeted by the drive-by media because it shows al-Qaeda's still in the game.
We might have taken out Zarkawi, but the drive-by media theme is that that doesn't mean anything.
Zarkawi, it's meaningless.
As I discussed in the previous hour, we have language deficit disorder.
Amnesty isn't amnesty anymore.
Cut and run doesn't mean cut and run.
And of course, killing Zarkawi and getting rid of him is meaningless.
Anything they can do to detract from American victory and achievement, the Drive-By Media and the American left will do.
So now that we've got this new successor, will the Huffington Post give him a chance to blog to tell us what his plans are?
Wouldn't be surprised if the new Al-Qaeda successor to Zarkawi gets his own place on the Huffington Post, or maybe he gets a blog at Daily Coast or somebody's moveon.org.
Got somebody who'll give this guy a position so he can write about his plans.
Al-Qaeda's plans at the same time rip the Bush administration and the infidels and the Western culture and so forth.
I mean, I know it's a long shot, but I would not be surprised.
A new type of hammerhead shark has been discovered in the northwestern Atlantic Ocean.
The shark resembles a common species called a scalloped hammerhead, but has not yet been classified or named.
U.S. researchers say the animal appears to be rare, breeding only in waters off the South Carolina coast.
Well, it better skedaddle or it's going to get hit by the hurricane and it may be extinct.
The shark was discovered by a biology professor at the University of South Carolina.
How can this be?
I thought that we were destroying species.
I thought, how many species a week are we losing here because of American progress and technological advancement and pollution and so forth and global warming?
Got to be hundreds of them out there.
Yet we keep discovering these new species in faraway places and nearby places.
There was a story last week that we discovered a new species, a mammal that looks like a cross between a zebra and a giraffe.
Yeah, and I had a picture of it.
How do you miss that?
How do you miss something?
It looks like a cross between a zebra and a giraffe.
Here we've been around for whatever, you want to say 6,000, 10,000, 6 million, whatever years, and we are still discovering new species.
Well, the Cybercast News Service is reporting, they did so on Friday, that a new family movie about football called Facing the Giants has been given a PG rating by the Motion Picture Association of America, apparently because it has too much religious content.
Story appears to have been first reported at the Scripps Howard News Service on Wednesday.
What the MPAA said is that the movie contains strong thematic elements that might disturb some parents.
This is a quote from Chris Fuhrer, vice president for marketing at Provident Films, which is owned by Sony Pictures.
Provident plans to open the film next fall to 380 theaters nationwide with the help of Samuel Goldwyn Films, which has worked with independent movies like The Squid and The Whale.
Just what kind of thematic elements are present?
Well, the Scripps Howard News Service article said that the MPAA tends to offer cryptic explanations for its ratings.
In this case, she was told that it decided the movie was heavily laden with messages from one religion and that this might offend people from other religions.
It's important that they use the word proselytizing when they talked about giving the movie a PG.
So there's too much God in this movie called Facing the Giants, a football movie, and it might offend people.
Of course, we have to have separation of church and state in the movies, especially after Passion of Christ.
They can't let that happen again.
We need to have separation of church and state there.
This is another sign, ladies and gentlemen, that the left is reeling and is grasping at straws and trying to head off what they see as a resurgence of people who have a value-oriented life and want to reflect that in movies.
And there's more of this plan.
I know that there are more and more people who are hoping to make independent movies that counter the general themes of cultural decay being celebrated, liberalism being promoted and so forth from Hollywood.
But the MPAA still has regulatory review over all these movies and granting them ratings and assigning them ratings.
But this is a new one.
Too much God, too much religion might offend people.
That's why we're going to put a PG on there.
Quick phone call before we go to the break.
It's Catherine in Allentown, Pennsylvania.
Great to have you with us.
Hi.
Wonderful to speak with you, Rush.
It's a real honor.
Rush, I'd like to make a point, if I may, please.
I'd like the news media and the TVs to show the victims of 9-11 and the victims of Sacawi's faces alongside his face.
I mean, I can remember after 9-11, they wanted to stop showing the disaster when we had been hit because people in the United States couldn't handle all this.
Yeah, it was too traumatic.
Traumatic.
So, I mean, if you're going to show his face, how about we show the faces of all the people that he has hurt?
I mean, I find this really reprehensible that they're allowed to continue to show it without any thought to the people and the hurt and the absolute disaster that he has.
Well, in the case of Zarkawi, it is the U.S. military showing the pictures and the media, of course, eating it up.
One of the reasons for it is to prove to the Western world and the Muslim world that he's dead.
If we just go out there and assert it and say we're not going to show pictures because it's too gruesome, then there would be doubters.
So we have the pictures.
They did clean him up considerably from how he appeared after the damage of the bombs.
But I think in this case, it was done to prove the claim and to establish it with incontrovertible evidence.
My point, Rush, is that, yes, the first day, but I'm talking, maybe I had to make myself clear, day after day that we keep seeing it.
After that first one or two days where we prove that he's dead, when they keep using this, oh, he may have been, you know.
By the way, why do you suspect that is being done?
Why is his face being shown over and over and over again?
I was talking to my husband when we first learned of this.
I said, within seconds, we're going to have, as you called in the drive-by meeting, which I completely agree with, starting to make these analogies that, you know, he was held by us and we did him in.
And, you know, I just, I knew that this was going to come about.
Even before you were on the air, before you mentioned it, I knew this was going to come about.
And I think that they're trying to eventually show his face constantly to make a victim out of him.
Yeah, that's exactly right.
What happens when the U.S. military gets in gear, how unfair it is that it just, you know, okay, so we had him.
Why drop 500-pound bombs?
I mean, why go to such excess?
Why not go there, try to negotiate?
Why not try to capture?
Why not learn what he knows?
Why not charge him and put him on trial?
Why are we being so inhumane and uncivil?
Blah, blah, blah, blah.
That's exactly right.
That's the prism that this coverage is being conducted through.
I think that the Zagawi's replacement, I think these people have the gang mentality.
I don't care what culture they come from.
And I told the screener, I said, I have a feeling that personally this man must feel really shaken about it.
I don't care what the front, what he's trying to present, but he has to know he has a bigger target on his back, and he has to not be able to sleep as well as he did before.
And that's my opinion, Rush.
You nailed it when you're comparing al-Qaeda to like a gang.
I mean, they may have a little bit more regimented organization than that, but you're right in this sense.
Al-Qaeda doesn't appoint leaders.
Zarkawi, who appointed Bin Laden?
Nobody.
He assumed it.
He self-appointed himself.
These are thugs.
These are renegades.
These are abject criminals.
They will kill their own opposition within the group in order to achieve power.
They don't have meetings and Democratic votes and elections to come up with a successor.
This is all just a smokescreen to create a false image in the minds of the drive-by media who will lap it up and fall for it like that.
They already have.
You can tell by the breathlessness of the reporting.
A quick time out here.
Thanks very much, Catherine.
We'll be right back.
You ain't seen.
No, What you thought I wasn't paying attention?
I was printing something out from the computer.
I can do multitasking quite well.
You know, ever since I missed that commercial break, when I was out in L.A., You people have no confidence that I can run this show anymore in terms of executing the programming format that Mike and Mission Viejo.
You're on the EIB network.
Hello, sir.
Rush, many dittos.
It's an option.
Thank you.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you.
I'm surprised that we haven't had a congressional investigation yet on this death.
Give him time.
I'm surprised they haven't already started beating their drums.
What in a full congressional investigation of who actually killed him, why we killed him.
I wanted to get your take on that.
I think it's unlikely to happen, but I would not be surprised if it does.
If it does, it's going to take some time here for this to happen.
It'll take a couple more reports that we stomped on his chest, beat him up, blood flowing from his nose and so forth.
Of course, the answer to that is it isn't getting CPR.
We're trying to save his life.
What does somebody off-site know?
Okay, can't tell what we're actually doing.
We're desperately trying to save the guy, blah, blah, blah.
But if there's ever at any time in the days ahead in this story that the Democrats think they can make some headway with their base by conducting an investigation into the events leading up to and including the murder of Zarkowi, they'll do it.
But as I say, it's a long shot.
And I say it's a long shot because I am holding here in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers another literally hilarious story on the Democrats and their agenda.
Like it right here.
It's from the San Francisco Chronicle.
It's by their reporter, their Washington Bureau Chief, Mark Sandalow.
And the headline is Democrats to roll out action plan, program on domestic issues, part of strategiery to retake house.
The Democratic program will consist of bread and butter priorities, increasing the minimum wage, cutting the costs of prescription drugs, reducing interest rates on student loans, rolling back subsidies for the oil companies, and pay-as-you-go budgeting, according to party officials.
Now, let me give you just, let's run this down.
Okay, we've got bread and butter priorities.
Now, this is what they abandoned in 2002.
In 2002, when Bush was preparing or really beating the drums of war over Iraq, the Democrats, they looked at the polls and the American people are up for this.
They wanted a new resolution.
They wanted a new resolution where there could be debate and they could actually vote for the concept of authorizing the use of force in Iraq.
And they did this in September and October, right before the midterms in 2002.
And Bush was more than happy to let them do this because they abandoned their back pocket kitchen table bread and butter priority issues in order to do it.
I think we're not going to make this mistake again.
Besides, they think they have succeeded in convincing everybody to oppose the war.
So in this plan, you could read this whole story and it prints out over four pages here.
There's not one mention of the war in this action plan.
Not one mention of any policy regarding the war.
War?
What war?
There's also nothing on immigration in this plan either.
Which means that the Democrats have not changed.
They are gutless, and their people and the base are going to be livid that there's nothing about the war in this plan.
I mean, this is the same tired, worn-out agenda that they have been using my whole life.
Increase the minimum wage, cut the cost of prescription drugs, i.e., health care, reduced interest rates on student loans, roll back.
And the reason they're doing that, they've got a new push on turning out the younger vote.
And they hope to use these kook bloggers on the left to help them do that, as it helped Howard Dean.
And rolling back subsidies for oil companies, that's typical.
They're anti-capitalist.
They think they can ride to power in Washington, D.C. by appearing to be anti-big oil, anti-big drug, anti-Walmart, anti-anything.
This is like I said last week.
The title for this new agenda is We're Democrats and We're Shooting for the Lowest We Can Be.
How bad can America be?
Elect us and we can find out.
We don't deserve to be great.
We don't deserve to be good.
It's immoral to be good.
It's unfair to be good because some people lose when you're good.
It's unfair when you're big.
We will incorporate everybody and we're all going to be equally miserable, but we will be equal.
We have what it takes to take what you've got.
You want to be the worst you can be and not suffer for it.
Elect us, the Democrats.
That's the slogan.
You want to be the worst you can be.
We're your guys.
So they attack anything that's successful as inherently unfair.
And then this pay-as-you-go budgeting.
What is pay-as-you-go budgeting?
Well, if you read through this thing, as I have done, and I don't recommend you do it, it's not necessary.
That's why I'm here.
Feel free if you want to.
We will link to this at rushlimbaugh.com later this afternoon.
But you will find no spending cuts as you read this.
So pay-as-you-go budgeting means tax increases.
That's just, it's like LDD, language deficit disorder.
They don't dare say we're going to raise your taxes.
No, We're going to have pay-as-you-go budgeting.
We're not going to have any cuts in spending.
And so you are going to pay as we go, the Democrats say.
As we go about our merry waves of spending, you will pay.
We've got what it takes to take what you've got.
Democratic strategists are split among those who believe the party must aggressively show voters what they offer as a reasonable alternative and those who warn against providing a target that might rally opponents.
I suppose some people are waiting for this infamous contract with America, said Diane Farrell, a Democrat challenging Chris Shays in Connecticut.
The end of the day, though, House re-elections in particular are more personalized than a general message from a party.
Oh, really?
I thought you guys were going to try to nationalize these elections like the Republicans did in 94.
Now you're not going to do that.
The bottom line, folks, they're clueless, gutless, and still have no plan whatsoever.
They just want us to think they do.
We will be back.
Stay with us.
Thank you.
I know.
A special welcome to those of you watching the program today on the DittoCam at RushLimbaugh.com, an exclusive feature for subscribers and members at rushlimbaugh.com.
They get to watch the program take place in addition to being able to hear it.
People, and I, by the way, I'm happy to do this.
Rush, what do you mean drive-by media?
People tune in frequently, first time in a long time, first time ever, and they hear the phrase, they think they understand it.
Let me run through it because it's well worth repeating.
Drive-by media are just like drive-by shooters.
They pull up to a congested area.
They spray a hail of bullets into the crowd.
This causes mass hysteria, mass confusion, many mistakes and misinterpretations.
Sometimes people or their careers actually die.
And then in the midst of all this confusion, in the midst of all these mistakes and misinterpretations, in the midst of all this hysteria, the drive-by media smirks and laughs and marvels at their own power to create chaos and tumult.
And they ride away.
They head in the convertible, they head on down the highway, looking for the next congested area to spray their hail of bullets into the crowd.
They are unnoticed in all the excitement.
They're never blamed.
They are never held accountable.
In fact, drive-by media lauded and held up as heroes, mostly by themselves, for calling attention to such dangerous circumstances that we all needed to know about.
And while decent, normal, everyday people are engaged in mopping up and cleaning up the messes that the drive-by media caused.
There they are in the convertibles, heading down the highway with the top-down, laughing and looking for their next victims with the cameras and microphones pointed in all directions, hoping to find the next area of chaos that they can expand, exploit, and create.
And this is repeated over and over and over.
And there appears to be no way to stop them.
Appears to be no way to stop their marauding ways.
Everything is now a crisis.
Crisis, crisis, crisis, the drive-by media creates them, tries to find as many as possible.
And that's the reason for the analogy.
Let me go up to line four.
I want to grab this guy from Baton Rouge.
David, welcome to the EIB Network.
Nice to have you with us, sir.
Good afternoon, Rush.
How are you, sir?
Rush, I am.
Just fine.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Rush.
Rush, I live in a little community by the name of Dutchtown, Louisiana.
I'm probably about 45 miles east-northeast of New Orleans.
And so I personally had experiences, not in New Orleans, but I experienced all of the flyovers coming from this area.
And believe me, the sky was full of helicopters for about five to seven days after Katrina.
And I personally have been trying to find out exactly what happened.
You know, the major news media reported all kinds of very negative things that happened.
And I'm telling you, Rush, they got so much so wrong that I now no longer trust the mainstream media at all.
Well, that's good.
It's a long time coming, but join the club.
Whatever real-life experience it takes, that's good.
I would just assume you experience it for yourself rather than trust me, although don't doubt me.
When I do tell you these things, don't doubt me.
But I understand.
It'll have even greater impact if you see it for yourself.
And you're absolutely right.
And yet, they all got awards.
They all gave themselves awards for their Katrina reporting.
They got book deals.
They got television appearances.
They're heralded because they cried and they saw all of the suffering and all of the damage.
And it was bad.
And they had the sensitivity to cry about it on television.
They showed their emotions like they wonderful people.
And so then gave themselves awards.
But it sort of got glossed over that a good percentage of what they reported was nothing but myth.
A lot of it was just myth.
The deaths, the destruction, all of the stuff in the superdome, the toxic soup that was the water that had flooded New Orleans.
All of this was bogus.
And if you're going to doubt them in other places, let me suggest to you, David, that you have some doubts in there reporting about what's going on in the war on terror, individual incidents like this Haditha.
For example, the lawyer for a Marine being investigated in the deaths of two dozen civilians in Haditha described the event as tragic but denied that innocent people were killed intentionally.
He said the troops followed military rules of engagement.
Now, no one's been charged in the Haditha case, but you wouldn't believe that listening to the drive-by media.
The case centers on allegations that a small number of Marines from Camp Pendleton's 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment, killed 24 Iraqi civilians, including unarmed women, unarmed women, and children, on November 19th after a roadside bomb killed a fellow Marine.
Lawyer Neil Puckett said Sunday that Staff Sergeant Frank Waterich, 26, told him that several civilians were killed after the bombing when his squad pursued insurgents firing at them from inside a house.
Puckett quoted the sergeant as describing a house-to-house search that went wrong and resulted in unintended civilian deaths.
The Marine denied allegations of an intentional massacre.
Waterick told his lawyer that as he was attending to those in the Humvee, he saw a car carrying five military-aged males.
When the occupants were ordered to stop, they tried to flee.
The Marines shot the men, killing at least four of them.
He then told his lawyer that after the confrontation, Marines began to draw gunfire from a nearby house.
A four-man squad, including the Marine, Waterick, burst into the building to pursue the shooter.
And in the house, the Marines found a room with a closed door and heard rustling sounds coming from behind it.
Because they had taken machine gun fire, the Marines cleared the room in the way they had been trained.
Everything happened fast, the lawyer said.
There's no preparation.
There's no deliberation involved here.
It's just a quick reaction time, shooting and neutralizing any threat that might be in there.
And in these cases, it turns out after the fact that there weren't threats in that room.
Now, the lawyer is saying that it's possible that none of the Marines would be charged with murder.
And instead, some commanders could be charged with dereliction duty for failing to properly investigate the incident at the time.
We've also learned, reported last week, that the primary culprit reporting this story, a Time magazine reporter, actually has sympathies toward the Taliban and Al-Qaeda and has written some things that are not favorable and kind about the U.S. military.
Clarice Feldman at theAmericanThinker.com, one of our favorite blogs, even speculates in a narrative that we might actually have another Mary Mapes type incident here in the reporting that has taken place on Haditha.
Yes.
Yes, we might, that this guy from the Time magazine might be the modern-day equivalent of Mary Mapes.
She's put together a blog has just listed all of the various elements of this story called Sweetness and Light.
And what happened was that I think Clarice Feldman got hold of the Sweetness and Light people and asked if they would mind if she used some of their data to write a narrative form of the information they've got.
And we shared that with you.
It's currently up on our website.
The link to it is up on the website now because it's from Friday.
So keep your powder dry on this one, folks, because it's a classic, I think, illustration, if it turns out to be, that the prism and the lens through which the drive-by media looks at this event in this whole war against in Iraq, against al-Qaeda, the whole war on terror, isn't it somehow we are the ones immoral?
We are the ones that are being inhumane.
We are the ones who are uncivil.
And you know that that exists because we've seen it in Abu Ghraib.
We've seen it in Club Gitmo.
It continues today in this whole Club Gitmost.
For example, from the Philadelphia Inquirer, Night Ritter News Service.
Story by Carol Rosenberg.
Headline.
Prisoners at Club Gitmo linked to terrorism, U.S. says.
Well, no kidding.
This is news.
Guantanamo Bay Navy Base Cuba.
The three men who killed themselves at the prison here included a mid-to-high-level al-Qaeda operative, a Saudi who sided with the Taliban against the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, and a supporter of a banned extremist group that helped arrange travel for al-Qaeda loyalists, the military said yesterday.
Really?
The people at Guantanamo are terrorists?
You're kidding.
The people who committed suicide were people with terrorist links?
No.
I can't believe, folks.
I got to take a break to digest this.
I was not prepared for this news today.
Back in just a moment.
And we're back.
Great to have you, Rush Limbaugh.
On the cutting edge of societal evolution amidst billowing clouds of fragrant, aromatic first and second-hand premium cigar smoke.
Jeff in Morristown, Tennessee.
You're up next, sir.
Great to have you with us.
Mega Ditto's Rush.
How are you today?
Thank you.
Good, sir.
You're my favorite American, I got to tell you.
Thank you.
I appreciate that.
No problem.
I just wondered if you, you know, you were talking about Club Gitmo there before the break.
I was curious if you're going to go see the new movie coming out about Club Gitmo.
Which movie would that be?
That would be the one that's supposedly hitting theaters June 23rd called The Road to Guantanamo about the Tipton III from Great Britain.
The Tipton III?
Yes.
You mean that's three British, these were the guys that were held there for two years and they were released without being charged.
That's exactly right, sir.
It's going to be a part documentary, part dramatization.
It's going to chronic their sequence of events that took them from Great Britain to Camp X-Ray to Camp Delta down there at Club Gitmo.
And do you know how many Americans are going to give a rat's rear end?
Well, the problem is, I see the Libs are not able to defeat us at the ballot box.
They're not, the terrorists can't win on the battlefield.
So now they've got to take it to the theaters and call it entertainment, but they're going to play on that subliminal line where this has to be a little bit true.
There's got to be some sort of consultation.
Let's take a look here at what the left is doing.
The left, and I don't mean to personalize this, but I would be dishonest, and I wouldn't be reporting this accurately if I didn't do it this way.
This program started in 1988, and since about 1989, the Democratic Party has been trying to come up with some way to counter this program and all the other talk radio programs spawned by the success of this one.
They have failed in every way.
They keep trying.
I can't tell you the number of things.
I don't have enough fingers on both hands.
First, it was Mario Cuomo that was going to be the new Rush Limbaugh.
Then it was going to be Jim Hightower.
Then it was going to be Gary Hartpence.
As these guys got weekly talk shows on Saturday mornings for two hours each.
The New York Times are doing lengthy profiles on each of these people and their brave and courageous effort to get into this new venue, this new genre of talk radio.
And they were holding out hope at all these places that one of these people, once a week for two hours, would be able to counter this program.
It didn't work.
Then they were dormant for a while because Clinton came along and won, and they thought that was the end of Rush Limbaugh.
They thought, what would, you know, that means that Limbaugh has just been defeated along with the Republican Party.
America has rejected Limbaugh's views.
Then the House freshman, 1994, assume office as the new majority, the Republicans, and the Democrats go into conniption fit again.
But in this case, they used Bill and Hillary to attempt to discredit and damage me.
Clinton calling KMOX Radio in St. Louis from Air Force One.
Mrs. Clinton convening Pretty and Pink press conferences after appearances that I would make on Nightline.
And they used basically the bully pulpit of the White House to try to damage my credibility and whatever, even so far as blaming me, Mike McCurry, press spokesman, blaming me for inciting anti-government hatred that led to the bombing of the Mura building in Oklahoma City.
Now, stick with me on this, Jeff, because this is all leading up to the point of your call.
During the Clinton years, they got distracted by the impeachment and so forth, the Monica Lewinsky circumstance.
But there were still efforts being made to counter the success of Limbaugh and talk radio.
Finally, nothing that they tried worked, and it still hasn't worked, but they're still trying.
Now, the latest manifestations of this are Michael Moore, the movie Fahrenheit 911, because a lot of people ostensibly went to see that.
They thought, aha, this is a way to counter Limbaugh and the conservatives on talk radio.
We'll use our medium.
We're Hollywood.
We own the big screen.
We'll control the big screen.
So they did that.
It did not result in their winning an election.
Then they went out.
You know what we need to do?
We need to get our own talk radio network.
That's what we'll do.
So they went out there and they got AIR, E-R-R, America.
And they put these guys.
And nobody's listening.
Other than in Portland, Oregon, where maybe 10 people do.
Nobody is listening.
It has been a tremendous, demonstrable failure.
The latest attempt, the New York Times and everybody going gaga over the blogger convention in Las Vegas this weekend.
We have audio tape.
We have Nancy Pelosi out there.
We have Barbara Boxer out there.
We had Mark Warner out there.
We had dingy Harry Reid out there.
These bloggers are now going to be the ticket.
In fact, I've got this guy, Marcos Militsis, whose site sponsored this convention, being asked on some Sunday showing by Russert if the blogs are the response to Rush Limbaugh.
He says, yeah, but we're not nearly that big.
We've got a long way to go.
So every effort, Jeff, they have made has failed.
They tried Abu Grab.
They tried Club Gitmo.
They still can't win elections.
They cannot gain ground doing anything they're trying, but they're not giving up.
And the reason they don't give up, or they haven't changed tactics.
And the reason they don't change tactics is because they don't think there's anything wrong with what they're doing.
It's just the American people are stupid and idiotic and don't get it.
And in those circumstances, they're just going to keep drumming it into people's head until people do get it.
And so they're going back to the Moore example now with this movie, The Road to Guantanamo.
They really think that a movie describing the unfairness and the inequality and the human rights violations of the Bush administration with these three terrorists is going to turn the tide.
I'm telling you, they're wandering aimlessly in the ocean.
They're in a rowboat with no oars.
And they have no sense of direction.
All they can do is look back.
And they look back at what they think were their successes.
They see their failures.
They see them as successes that didn't quite get there.
They'll keep trying it.
It is laughable.
It's humorous to see.
Bottom line is, nobody will care outside of the people who are already worked up about Club Gitmo and Abu Ghrab.
And I would suggest to you, it's nowhere near a majority of the American people.
So it's kind of comical to watch this because the one thing that they ought to be able to do to counter their ideological enemies is come up with better ideas.
They have failed to discredit ours.
They don't even try that.
They try discrediting the messengers.
I don't care if it's Ann Coulter.
I don't care if it's Bill Buckley.
I don't care if it's Clarence Thomas.
I don't care if it's me.
I don't care if it's Sean Hannity.
I don't care who it is.
They have gone out of their way to characterize all of us as hate-mongers, mean-spirited, racist, sexist, bigot, homophobes, rather than deal with us where we're playing a game, and that's in the arena of ideas.
They refuse to join us on the field because they know they will lose.
So they're going back to these territories they think they own, i.e. Hollywood, with an absolute joke of a movie that they just don't understand.
Most Americans realize we're in a war with these people and are not going to have their minds or votes changed by little piddly movies made by Hollywood leftists.
Okay, audio soundbites coming from Ram Emanuel, spending the Democrat moral victory in California 50 last week.
The Daily Coast Convention and Meet the Press all next.
Plus your phone calls.
▲
Export Selection