Rush Limbaugh Program - July 18, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 18, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:27

July 18, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
	And greetings to you once again, thrill seekers, music lovers, and conversationalists all across the bountiful fruited plan, the award-winning Rush Limbaugh program and the Excellence in Broadcasting Network on the air.
	This is America's most listened to radio talk show, 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.
	Well, there's no end in sight to the controversy and the war going on between the Hezbollah crowd and the Israelis and the Iranians and whoever.
	But some interesting arguments are springing up now in this country.
	Yesterday, or I guess as yesterday, earlier this week, in the Weekly Standard, there was a column by Bill Kristol, who's the editor-in-chief over there, basically saying Bush should go to Jerusalem and the U.S. should confront Iran.
	And basically, this is, I hadn't seen it until today when George Will referenced it and disagrees with it totally, which is interesting is there's an argument here among the conservative intellectual elites over what the proper course for United States involvement in this war is.
	By the way, our helicopters are over there evacuating.
	And get this.
	They're evacuating American citizens.
	Some 320 are leaving today.
	Over 1,000 will leave tomorrow.
	Military helicopters are there offloading.
	And the drive-by media's big concern is they've heard that the people being evacuated are going to have to reimburse the government for the trip out.
	And so they get all these experts on asking, well, is this the way other countries do it?
	I thought other countries just pay to evacuate their own citizens.
	Most of the time when the U.S. issues an evac order, I mean, U.S. doesn't send airplanes over to get you.
	It doesn't call up JetBlue or American Airlines and say, we've chartered a bunch of 767s for you.
	Head on over to the airport and get on one of them.
	It's up to people to get out of there at their own expense.
	But they're making a big deal out of that.
	There's also an effort underway to humanize Hezbollah, which is not surprising.
	Bush is the real enemy.
	If it weren't so serious, it should be comical.
	The Drive-By Media, let's go to Audio Soundbite number one.
	The Drive-By Media doing everything to humanize Hezbollah.
	They run social welfare programs in Lebanon at midnight, basketball plans for the poor.
	And they're socially active.
	It sort of reminds me of when Senator Patty Murray from Washington talked after 9-11, talked about Osama bin Laden and about how he was, the reason he had so much support for people was he built them roads and he built them schools.
	And so people were pulling their hair out.
	We have a little montage from John King at CNN, Andrea Mitchell, and Basin News, Washington, and Miles O'Brien from CNN and Yaroslav Tromivov, wherever he is from, or her, whatever she's from, describing the greatness and the kindnesses engaged in by Hezbollah.
	Hezbollah is a significant political force in Lebanon, holding seats in parliament and running cabinet ministries and building public support by running social welfare programs.
	Hezbollah's charismatic leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, has become Lebanon's best-known and most controversial politician.
	Nasrallah provides social services.
	See the militant side of Hezbollah, but Hezbollah derives support from its civilian component, its ability to deliver services.
	Hezbollah doesn't just fight, but it also runs a construction branch, which is called the Construction Jihad, which builds houses for its members.
	Hold it, hold it, stop the take.
	Construction jihad?
	Do you know what a jihad is?
	Jihad's a holy war.
	Construction jihad.
	All right, resume tape.
	It even runs a social service for the veterans, for the wounded in its battles with the matchmaking branch.
	It finds wives, for example, for these veterans who marry them out of a sense of jihad without even meeting them first.
	Well, that's an actually great social service.
	Why we should use that here.
	Find wives for people before you've even met them.
	Sounds to me like that kind of stuff used to happen way, way back in the 12th and 14th centuries.
	At any rate, so you see what's happening here.
	Hezbollah, which is a terrorist organization.
	They are a terrorist organization.
	The charismatic leader, is that what Andrea Mitchell said?
	Hezbollah's charismatic leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.
	My friends, I saw a there's a bunch of people out there that are producing movies and documentaries.
	And of course, as a powerful, influential member of the media, I received many of these.
	And there's one being produced.
	It's pretty serious and pretty well done.
	And it's not available yet.
	It's not anywhere out.
	It's called Obsession.
	And in this DVD, it goes about an hour and a half.
	There are many clips of this so-called charismatic Hezbollah leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah.
	The guy is a flaming maniac.
	There is nothing charismatic.
	Well, I mean, you might want to say he's charismatic in the sense that he's able to convince his own people to strap bombs all over them and go up and blow themselves up, including his own son in 1997.
	I guess you could call that charismatic.
	And then he had the audacity to talk about how proud he was of his son for this kind of sacrifice.
	He's typical of these guys.
	He has everybody else to go out and do the dirty work, but you don't see him in the ditch in the construction jihad, and you don't see him strapping bombs all over himself.
	But I'm going to have to watch this thing again because this guy is all over it, along with a bunch of other guys like him.
	And they're out there swearing and promising death to all the infidels, and they're stirring crowds up into a frenzy.
	And this silly notion that they provide social services and so forth, as though the Israelis don't?
	As though we don't?
	As though the Brits don't?
	As though the Dutch don't?
	As though the Japanese, the Chinese, and the Asians don't?
	Hezbollah does.
	What is the incessant need on the part of the drive-bys to humanize?
	Well, I don't even finish asking the question because I am capable of answering it.
	They are the small thride.
	They are the victims.
	And they are the people of color.
	And they are very small.
	And it's the big, powerful, mean Israel with jets and big tanks against these poor people who are just trying to provide construction jihad and wife swapping services for veterans.
	White nut swapping.
	Well, that probably happens too.
	Wife finding service.
	What a great culture.
	And here Israel is on the verge of wiping them out.
	Why we can't sit by and tolerate this.
	Remember the call we had yesterday from Pamela, the blogger, who had been to the pro-Israel rally in New York City, who was just excited.
	And I went and looked at her website.
	And she's a babe.
	She's got, I think, four kids, if I read right, but she's very active, and she's got pictures from this thing yesterday.
	Some of the finest, funniest pictures of Hillary that I have seen.
	She was talking a blue streak, and she mentions on her website, and I'll get the link here in a second.
	I've still got it there.
	I just love it written down.
	I'll get it to you after the break here.
	But she talks about how the big thing of the day was getting through to me and spreading the word on this program about the rally.
	But she said something that Ellie Wiesel was there, and Ellie Wiesel thanked God for President Bush.
	And she said, you won't see this anywhere else.
	This won't be reported anywhere.
	And she was right.
	But we have the audio of Ellie Wiesel.
	This is reported nowhere else in the drive-by media.
	This is internet quality here, but you'll be able to hear Ellie Wiesel speaking yesterday at the pro-Israel rally in New York City.
	You are not alone.
	You never will be alone.
	We are with you, and America is with you.
	And the President of the United States, thank God for the love.
	Well, there you have it.
	And in terms of someone with, look at now, we got another profile piece on this wacko.
	Every time I see his name, Hassan Nasrallah, I think of nostrils.
	I think of a nose.
	Just like that terrorist that killed Meyer Kahani, Abu Salam nose hair or something.
	There he is.
	Look at CNN International is doing a puff piece profile on this guy and how great he is and what he's meant to his peoples and so forth.
	Here's Hillary at the same rally, by the way.
	A montage of Hillary at the pro-Israel rally.
	Just listen, and I have a question for you.
	Israel has every right to defend herself, and the world must know that the United States, our government, and our people will stand with Israel.
	We will support her efforts to send a message to Hamas, Hezbollah, to the Syrians, to the Iranians, to all who seek death and domination instead of life and freedom.
	Okay, does that sound presidential to you?
	Does it sound like a future president shrieking at you there, ladies and gentlemen, or an ex-wife?
	I had a chance to tune into some of this puff piece profile of, well, what's his Hassan Nasrallah?
	It's not Nazarally, snurdly, it's Nasrallah.
	At any rate, this was so funny.
	They got their reporter out there, and apparently the big story is he's huge in Syria.
	They love Nasrallah in Syria, got wide support.
	Hey, even go to Singapore, you go anywhere in the world, and there are posters of this guy all over the towns.
	And they love this guy, and he's got total support.
	And sometimes, wait a second here.
	I know how PR works, and I know that these mass movements require all kinds of...
	These are not even free societies we're talking about where people can put posters up of who they like, put the wrong poster up, and you get gunned down in five minutes in most of these places.
	I know how this PR works.
	It's amazing.
	The media, if they want to, drive-by media will fall for the slickest PR campaign, depending on who puts it out.
	So it's clear that there's an effort now to humanize and to soften the image of a bunch of terrorists.
	Do you know how long they have been around?
	They are terrorists.
	These are the clowns that blew up the Marine barracks in Beirut.
	These are the clowns that participated in the Kobar Towers bombing.
	These clowns have been terrorists for a long time.
	But all of a sudden, now that they're engaged with a U.S. ally, why they're just poor little wife finders, construction workers, doctors and nurses, water sanitation experts, school teachers.
	It never gets easy.
	Doing the right thing and being the big guy is never an easy thing, particularly when so many of the members of your club resent you.
	And I would say that that represents the drive-by media.
	Let me get to this comparison here between George Will and Bill Crystal, because I hadn't seen Bill Crystal's piece until I saw Will's piece today.
	So I went and got Crystal's piece.
	And Crystal, in the Weekly Standard, Bill Crystal basically lays out what I laid out yesterday.
	A lot of people are.
	I call it a gift to the world, this whole event that's happening over there, because we've got an Iran that is building up toward being nuclear weapons capable.
	And the question that we all have to ask ourselves is, do we have a plan of dealing with a nuclear Iran beyond containment?
	There are a bunch of, how shall I say, highbrow intellectuals, smarter than all the rest of, ladies and gentlemen, containment did work with Stalin, and the containment worked with the Kustav, and the containment worked with Brezhnev, as though it is a legitimate containment.
	They mean, go ahead and let them have the nukes, but then keep a sharp eye out.
	Well, I just, I marvel that these are the people who are credited with being the smartest people in the room, these intellectuals.
	But the real question is, do we want to deal with this?
	Now, I know some of you might say, what right do we have to say to country A, you can't have nukes and country B, you can?
	It's called leadership.
	If you don't believe in the concept that we are the good guys, then you're going to have problems understanding this whole thing.
	If you think we're evil, I know a lot of Americans do, because they're laden with self-loathing and guilt, but for the vast majority of people, we don't want another, especially we don't want another Korea, North Korea, a nation with nukes that's constantly threatening to use them, constantly, and can use them for blackmail.
	You know, freedom-loving societies have these weapons as deterrence.
	You have them to prevent the fact that they get used or to prevent their usage or to be able to defend yourself if they do happen to be used against you.
	When you have a nation that's out there actively suggesting they want nuclear weapons to blow Israel off the map or to do whatever else they want, you have to take this rather seriously.
	So the question becomes, do we want to deal with a nuclear Iran?
	And the real then challenge is if we say no, then what do we do about it?
	Because as I said yesterday, Israel can't do it alone.
	They might be able to get some missions.
	They could fly maybe some missions and maybe have some success bombing nuclear targets in Iran, but they can't send ground forces in there, and it may not even be necessary.
	But they've opened this Western front with Hezbollah, and they're occupied with that.
	And I'm also reading people saying, but this is not like previous conflicts.
	What this is about is this is really just about two Israeli soldiers that have been kidnapped.
	It's about so little.
	Why is it escalating out of control?
	It's just about Tus if Israel would just forget it.
	I mean, it happens.
	It's war.
	Now, Israel's supposed to forget there too.
	We're supposed to keep a headcount of our 2,500 plus and get out of the war in Iraq as a result of it.
	Well, you know, who cares?
	Folks, the stimulus is going to be different on each occasion in a conflict like this where there are personal hatreds and enmities that have been around for 2,000 plus years.
	And the idea that this is just about two kidnapped Israeli soldiers misses the whole point.
	There's a theory being bandied about today that really this is Hezbollah covering weakness and all-ups and Syria getting worried about us and Iran being worried about the world's reaction to its nuke plans.
	So it was Amir Tahiri today, the New York Post, says these countries just throw the Israeli card.
	Whenever they get in trouble, blame Israel for something or do something to cause Israel to react and get all the focus off yourself.
	In this case, Iran and removing the focus on its nuclear program, Hezbollah and its focus, getting the focus off of its terrorism.
	And of course, Bashur Assad, he's in trouble because of the assassination of the former, forget what he's a very high official.
	Hariri might be indicted.
	When I read that, how can this be?
	When you are a dictator, how can you be indicted?
	I can't believe that Bashur Assad's really afraid that he's in any trouble because he killed a political enemy.
	It's what they do over there.
	I mean, it's like getting up and eating goat's eyes for breakfast.
	A lot of things I don't prefer.
	Fried goat's eyes, Mr. Sturtley.
	It's a delicacy.
	I saw it in the James Bond movie.
	And if anyway, it is.
	It is, if you can afford them.
	The goats.
	That is.
	So you are left here to wonder, well, is this really over just two Israeli soldiers or is it far more complicated?
	Whatever it is, it's happening.
	And whatever has caused it, it is happening and it's getting tougher.
	It's intensifying.
	And in the meantime, there is an opportunity.
	We know that Hezbollah is essentially the Iranian army in Syria.
	But Rush, but Rush, they were elected.
	Yeah, they're elected, but they're not part of the Lebanese government, are they?
	Lebanon has a democracy and Lebanese have elected their leadership, but they have not elected the Hezbollah.
	Hezbollah people elected this, whoever they've elected.
	But you've got a state within a state when you're talking about Hezbollah and Lebanon.
	And that's one of George Will's points, which I'm going to get to when I have a little bit more time after the next break to compare what he and some of the other conventional theories are about dealing with Iran, because the real question does boil down to, do we want a nuclear Iran?
	And if we don't, what do we do about it?
	And you just can't say, well, it would be too hard to do something about it.
	If it's worth dealing with and doing, then how hard it is just gets factored into the equation and you do it.
	But the question is, are we headed in that direction as a country?
	And I don't profess to know.
	I tend to doubt it.
	Wish it weren't the case.
	Precisely what happens here.
	We make the complex understandable.
	Correction.
	I said that Hezbollah is not part of the Lebanese government.
	are, in the sense that they have a few members elected to the Lebanon Parliament, the Lebanese Parliament.
	Well, but it's a very, very small number of Hezbollah members that are elected to Parliament.
	However, they are, quote-unquote, a political party with their own militia.
	The way to look at Hezbollah, I mean, the Lebanese have an army, and it's not Hezbollah.
	Hezbollah, they're a bunch of terrorists.
	In fact, Ben Stein today in the American Spectator has an interesting piece.
	Let me read you some excerpts from it.
	Hezbollah are the most vicious killers imaginable.
	They killed 283 U.S. Marines in Lebanon in 1983.
	They are the ones that kicked a helpless Navy man, Robert Steedem, to death on a hijacked airliner.
	That was TWA, what was it, 847, going back and forth, Rome to Damascus.
	They have killed and mailed U.S. embassy people wherever they could.
	They blew up a Jewish community center filled with children in Buenos Aires.
	And in October of 2001, CNN was beating the drums to smash Hezbollah.
	Mike Becher, CNN correspondent with the voiceover, now CNN has learned that as part of any war on terrorism, U.S. officials are again targeting the alleged mastermind of the Beirut bombings.
	His name, Imad Magniya, a founder of the Lebanese Islamic militia, Hezbollah, which U.S. officials label as a terrorist group.
	This is as close as we can come to showing you his face.
	This was a voiceover of an audio or a video presentation.
	U.S. investigators say he is one of these men, the hijackers of TWA Flight 847 in 1985.
	His face has remained hidden for almost 20 years.
	He is believed to have had at least two plastic surgeries since the TWA operation.
	He's the unknown terrorist, but incredibly, before September 11th, he was considered by the U.S. to be responsible for killing more Americans than anyone else in the world.
	That is from basically Ben Stein's piece today at American Spectator Online.
	So as recently as 2001, CNN was telling us what a dangerous bunch of thugs Hezbollah is.
	Today, CNN International, a big puff piece on Noser Nasrallah or Hassan, whatever his name is, charismatic leader, builds roads, creates sewers, creates, probably even runs abortion clinics for all we know.
	It just does everything right.
	Very charismatic, loved and adored throughout the militant Islamic world.
	Now, back to this Iranian situation very quickly.
	Andy McCarthy, National Review Online today, posted a piece in which he posits the theory that Israel is actually fighting our war on terror here by taking on Hezbollah.
	That Hezbollah is Iran.
	They're just the Iranian army stationed in southern Lebanon as part of a deal with Syria, which is supposed to have pulled out of Lebanon years ago and has not done it.
	And he makes the point that no matter where you trace the lines here, it all leads back to Iran and asks the question that many people are asking, what do we do?
	We've got an opportunity here.
	What do we do about it?
	Because Iran is obviously ginning up nuclear weapons, and do we want this to happen?
	We declared a war on terror, and Israel is fighting our war in taking on Hezbollah.
	And McCarthy's point is it's time for us to go all out.
	I mean, it's one thing he says to build democracies and try to around the world, but that's not the objective of the war on terror.
	The objective of the war on terror is to kill militant Islamofascists, which does happen to be the definition of war.
	Kill people and break things.
	You know, people talking about proportionality, too.
	Well, I'm getting ahead of myself.
	Let me get to the one area of disagreement on all this, and it's from George Will today, Transformation's Toll.
	There is, however, a sense in which that argument creates a blind eye.
	It makes instability, no matter how pandemic or lethal, necessarily a sign of progress.
	Violence is vindication.
	Hamas and Hezbollah have, says Condoleezza Rice, determined that it is time now to try and arrest the move toward moderate democratic forces in the Middle East.
	He is responding here in writing to Rice on Sunday, making the point that, as we had a caller yesterday, I think echo that the hostilities here and all the tumult in the Arab world are actually a result of our success in Iraq in establishing a democratic outpost there.
	If you don't want to call it democratic calling, right of self-determination, people choose their own leaders rather than to have them chose for them by dictators and so forth.
	George Will's not so sure.
	He says there's also democratic movement toward extremism.
	America's intervention was supposed to democratize Iraq, which by benign infection would transform the region.
	Early on in the Iraq occupation, Secretary Rice argued that democratic institutions do not just spring from a hospitable political culture, they could also help create such a culture.
	Perhaps.
	But elections have transformed Hamas into the government of the Palestinian territories, and elections have turned Hezbollah into a significant faction in Lebanon's parliament, from which it operates as a state within the state.
	And as a possible harbinger of future horrors, last year's elections gave the Muslim Brotherhood 19% of the seats in Egyptians, in Egypt's parliament.
	The Bush administration has rightly refrained from criticizing the region's only democracy, Israel, for its forceful response to a thousand rockets fired at its population.
	U.S. reticence is seemly, considering that terrorism has been Israel's torment for decades, and that America responded to two hours of terrorism one September morning by toppling two regimes halfway around the world with wars that show no signs of ending.
	No Islamic Republic of Iran, no Hezbollah, no Islamic Republic of Iran, no one to prop up the Assad regime in Syria, no Iranian support for Syria.
	You get the drift.
	So says the Weekly Standard.
	We might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.
	Why wait?
	Anybody think a nuclear Iran can be contained?
	He's quoting now from Bill Kristol.
	That the current regime will negotiate in good faith.
	It would be easier to act sooner rather than later.
	Yeah, there'd be repercussions and there would be healthy ones.
	Showing a strong America that's rejected further appeasement.
	Why wait?
	George Will now writing in disagreement with Bill Kristol, perhaps because the U.S. military has enough on its plate in the deteriorating wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which both border Iran.
	And perhaps because containment, although of uncertain success, did work against Stalin and his successors and might be preferable to a war against a nation much larger and more formidable than Iraq.
	And if Bashir Assad's regime does not fall after the Weekly Standard's hope-for third war with Iran, does the magazine hope for a fourth war?
	As for the healthy repercussions that the Weekly Standard is so eager to experience from yet another war, one envies that publication's powers of prophecy but wishes it had exercised them on the nation's behalf before all of the surprises, all of them unpleasant, that Iraq has inflicted.
	And regarding the appeasement that the Weekly Standard decries, does the magazine really wish the administration had heeded its earlier editorial, December 20th, 2004, advocating war with yet another nation, the bombing of Syria?
	Neoconservatives have much to learn, concludes Mr. Will, even from Buddy Bell, manager of the Kansas City Royals.
	After his team lost its 10th consecutive game in April, Buddy Bell said, I never say it can't get worse.
	And in their next game, the Royals extended their losing streak to 11, and in May they lost 13 in a row.
	So Will is of the opinion that, hey, this is only going to get worse.
	It can get worse than what it is.
	He wants Nash, the, well, the thing about George Will, this is not new for him, though.
	I forget how long.
	It seems like a couple months ago now, but he wrote a piece that sort of stunned conservatives just ripping the Iraq effort as a total failure, a dismal failure, was not accomplishing anything, maybe causing problems.
	It almost sounded to me a little Buchanonian.
	Just coined a new word there, Buchanonian.
	But it's an interesting fissure that's happening here.
	And this is inside the Beltway stuff.
	This is Weekly Standard versus George Will.
	He's two highly intelligent intellectual conservatives.
	And when the drive-by media stops propping up Hassan Nasrallah and making him a teddy bear, they'll focus on this and they'll consider another conservative crack up occurring with George Will being a defector from the administration's position on this.
	The one thing that I just keep coming back to is, I guess you look down the road beyond your own life.
	You have to.
	Do we want a nuclear Iran?
	And I, you know, that's the question that people ask me all the time.
	Where do you gauge the national will on dealing with something like that?
	And I'll tell you what, I think our problem is, and I mentioned it yesterday.
	We are so prosperous in the midst of all this, in the midst of the rising gasoline prices, the economic news is still through the roof.
	Economic news is great.
	Drive around.
	People are driving around as much as I've ever seen them, driving around in new cars.
	Housing starts are going up.
	There is tremendous prosperity in this country.
	And I question whether some people even think that the situation in the Middle East or Iraq is ever going to have any bearing on their lives.
	With prosperity and affluence, it becomes easier to bury your head or turn away and not face certain dangers or dangerous realities that exist out there because times are so good you want to enjoy them.
	I don't mean people are not struggling.
	We've never been more prosperous and affluent as a society in our history than we are today.
	I'm just telling you, it does have an impact.
	You've heard the old adage, fat, dumb, and happy versus hungry and needy.
	We're not the same culture that we were in World War II, where the whole country banded together after the attack on Pearl Harbor.
	And even at that, we went into Germany first.
	European theater before we went to the Japanese theater.
	So I'm not well versed enough, and I don't believe polling data enough to be able to tell you where we are on this, but that's why you have leadership.
	And we'll see where the leadership takes us on this one.
	I got to run, take a quick timeout.
	Back after this.
	As usual, half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
	Back to the phones now to Toledo.
	Not back.
	We're starting your first today, Brandon, on the EIB network.
	Hello.
	Hey, Rush.
	It's a pleasure talking to you.
	Thank you, sir.
	Hey, I was just going to comment.
	I was watching the news all day today.
	It's my day off of work.
	And the Hezbollah story, you know, that's all I've been watching.
	And when you came out today with your intro saying that they were trying to, the left is trying to sympathize with the Hezbollah, it's just total, just crap.
	I mean, it's like you're the Michael Moore on the right, just blowing things out of proportion and totally turning them around.
	Well, that's your take.
	I saw what I saw, and I saw idolatry, and I look at, I see a bunch of lies being told about the guy.
	I hear it.
	I played the sound bites.
	Social services and all this sort of stuff.
	This is a cover for a murderous bunch of terrorists.
	It's no different than trying to make the mafia look like angels.
	No, I'm not sure.
	These are murdering terrorists.
	What is so hard to understand?
	Now, here's Tony Snow right now in CNN.
	He's doing his briefing at the White House, and they are showing a press conference, the video only, of this Hezbollah leader giving him moral equivalence to Tony Snow.
	We aren't even fighting these guys.
	Israel is.
	Now, you tell me why in the world what a major media operation, and this guy, this Hezbollah leader's picture right now is much bigger than Tony Snow's.
	He's getting a bigger area of the frame of the TV than is Tony Snow and the White House press conference today, the press briefing that he conducts.
	What's the purpose of that?
	No, I'm not sure what you're talking about here, but I wanted to go back to my point.
	When I was watching it, it just spent about 10 seconds talking about Hezbollah doing the social services, and that was just explaining how Hezbollah has infiltrated Lebanon's government and what they are doing.
	It was the left was in no way trying to say that they weren't a murderous terrorist group.
	I mean, I just think you're totally blown out of proportion, and they are terrorists, and they need to be stopped.
	But that was not the left's point of trying to dehumanize them and sympathize with them at all.
	Well, I think it is, and I think it's part of a pattern.
	It's not just Hezbollah.
	Bin Laden has been praised for some of the great social work he has done.
	And they do this, but you can't take the context out of it, Brandon.
	For example, let's do a comparison.
	I want you to go get audio soundbite number one, Mike, and then I want you to go get, I'm looking for it here.
	Let's see.
	I guess it's number 14.
	I want to play these cuts back to back just to illustrate my point.
	Here is a montage of CNN, MSNBC, CNN, and I don't know who this fourth guy is.
	Always the Wall Street Journal's reporter, Yaroslav Trofimov.
	And they're talking about Hezbollah and humanizing them.
	Listen to this again.
	Hezbollah is a significant political force in Lebanon, holding seats in parliament and running cabinet ministries and building public support by running social welfare programs.
	Hezbollah's charismatic leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, has become Lebanon's best-known and most controversial politician.
	Nasrallah provides social services.
	We see the militant side of Hezbollah, but Hezbollah derives support from its civilian component, its ability to deliver services.
	Hezbollah doesn't just fight, but it also runs a construction branch, which is called the Construction Jihad, which builds houses for its members.
	And it even runs a social service for the veterans, for the wounded in its battles with the matchmaking branch.
	It finds wives, for example, for these veterans who marry them out of a sense of jihad without even meeting them first.
	All right, now, let's go to cut 13 here.
	This is Chris Matthews talking with David Gregory on Hardball last night.
	We're all taught by our mothers never to talk when we're eating.
	We're also told by our colleagues, don't talk when the line is hot.
	Or did the president make both mistakes today?
	Well, it appears he did.
	It's certainly nothing different than the president has been saying.
	Right, so, and they've continued to focus on that slip of the tongue.
	Well, it wasn't a slip of the tongue, but the open mic where the president uttered this mild profanity and describing the byproduct of certain body functions.
	And meanwhile, we don't get any humanization of George W. Bush, and we certainly don't get any humanization of the American military.
	We don't get any stories about the heroism of the American military in Iraq.
	All we get are how there is a bunch of bloodthirsty murderers and how our prison people do nothing but torture and maim and humiliate people.
	If you look at the coverage, and this is something, Brandon, you cannot take out of the equation as part of the context.
	You look at the way the United States drive-by media treats its own members, in the U.S. military, its own citizens, and the prison guards and so forth, and the president, you compare it with that montage that I just played for you about Hassan Nasrallah and how wonderful he is and what great social services this terrorist group operates.
	I guarantee if you landed here from Mars and you watched the drive-by coverage of U.S. military personnel in Iraq versus the coverage of Hezbollah in the last couple of days, you would conclude Hezbollah is the good guys according to the drive-by media.
	And don't forget, Reuters doesn't even allow terrorists to be called terrorists in their news stories.
	Christian Science Monitor today, Hezbollah winning over Arab Street.

▲