Rush Limbaugh Program - July 25, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 25, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:28

July 25, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
	Hi, folks.
	How are you?
	Great to be with you.
	Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the man credited with saving AM Radio and making it dominant and predominant once again, sitting firmly behind the golden EIB microphone here at the prestigious Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
	A thrill, a delight to be with you today as every day.
	Telephone number 800-282-2882.
	Can you hear me?
	I can barely hear myself over the and the uh must be a mixed minus problem.
	No panic, Brian.
	Uh telephone numbers 800-282-2882 and the email address rush at EIVNet.com.
	I'm depressed, and I don't know why.
	Just one of those flatline kind of moods.
	Yeah, well, I sound fine now.
	I'm just being honest.
	You sounded great when you started.
	I'm look at professionalism rises to the top.
	Uh Mike goes on and so forth.
	I'm just being honest.
	I'm just in a little bit of a funk here.
	I don't even know why.
	It's that those are the worst kind.
	You know, when you're um when you're in a funk and you know why.
	Why do you think it you think I'm in a funk because it took the whole weekend off?
	No, no, no, no.
	No.
	I just played golf for 15 straight days.
	That's one of the reasons I uh I took it off.
	Anyway, are you watching TV today?
	Have you people seen the uh the media was going bonkers?
	They were orgasmic as they were watching bombs drop uh in uh in southern Lebanon, particularly on PMS NBC.
	But I want to tell you what this illustrates.
	What it really illustrates here, and it proves that the uh Israelis are showing enormous restraint.
	I mean, they could roll right through this entire country of Lebanon if they wanted to, all the way into Damascus.
	I hear this talk about proportionality, and it just well, it makes me mad.
	And it's uh you know, they're they're they're uh it's not a universal voice uh that is demanding Israeli proportionality.
	I'm still encouraged.
	I think there are a number of elements of conventional wisdom that uh are under assault and in the process of of changing.
	For example, you know, our morning update today took to task the humanitarian head hauncher of the United Nations, uh uh Jan Egland, but uh he accused Hezbollah yesterday.
	The Hezbollah's buttons my new name for them the Hezbows.
	You know, so many different pronunciations for these guys.
	Hezbollah, Hezbollah, Hizbulla, Hizbulla.
	I just the Hezbows uh takes less time, makes more sense.
	Uh this Jan Eglin uh was speaking with reporters at an airport in Cyprus late yesterday after a visit to Lebanon, and he accused a Hezbows of cowardly blending among Lebanese civilians and causing the deaths of hundreds during two weeks of cross-border violence with Israel.
	The uh the Hezbows have built bunkers and tunnels near the Israeli border to shelter weapons and fighters and its members easily blend in among civilians by design.
	Hell, they're not letting civilians leave.
	In fact, the Israelis have discovered, you know, that the Israelis fired on some ambulances, and oh my God, all hell break loose.
	Why, how can you possibly do this?
	Why that that's that's beyond the Geneva Convention.
	That's horrible.
	It's violating the rules of war.
	Well, the Israelis found out the Hezbollahs are transporting themselves in viol in uh in uh ambulances from uh one locale to the next.
	So it appears that their uh uh intelligence is uh improving a little bit at the uh at the same time.
	In addition to that, uh CNN's Nick Robertson has admitted that uh the Hezbows had control of his anti-Israel piece.
	This is one of the pieces I watched.
	Remember, we were talking about the humanization of Nasrala and the uh uh the the the how deeply involved in social services they are.
	I don't think it was that exact piece, but it was one it was one like it.
	Uh but Robertson admitted that uh that uh the Hezbows had control of his anti-Israel piece.
	Back on July 18th, a Hezbows took Robertson and his crew on a tour of a heavily damaged South Beirut neighborhood.
	The Hezbolla press officer even instructed the CNN camera.
	Just look, shoot, look at this building.
	Is it a military base?
	Is it a military base or just civilians living in this building?
	Uh So it was uh it was an orchestrated story in a in a setup uh to his interview with uh Nick Roberts and Howard Kurtz, by the way, who unveiled this on a CNN program reliable sources, played clips of NBC's Richard Engel and CBS's Elizabeth Palmer relating their trips to the damaged areas, with Palmer providing the sort of disclaimer that Robertson failed to include last week.
	This morning, the Hezbollah's showed journalists around the ruins of its former stronghold, but the Hesbows are determined that outsiders will only see what it wants them to see.
	CNN did not tag uh their report, thus.
	Interesting uh piece today, we find it by John Pedoritz.
	Amazing uh ladies and gentlemen, how this program is show prep for the rest of the media.
	Uh Padoritz J-Pod, as he's known among colleagues at National Review Online.
	Uh title of his piece today, Too Nice to Win, Israel's Dilemma.
	Let me just read you some of the questions he asks.
	What if liberal democracies have now evolved to a point where they can no longer wage war effectively because they've achieved a level of humanitarian concern for others that dwarfs any really cold-eyed pursuit of their own national interests?
	What if the universalist idea of liberal democracy, the idea that all people are created equal, has sunk in so deeply that we no longer assign special value to the lives and interests of our own people, as opposed to those in other countries?
	Well, I actually can't claim credit for being first with this.
	Shelby Steele was first with it in uh in his book White Guilt.
	But don't be put off by that title if you if you're just hearing about this for the first time.
	Shelby Steele's point is that uh superpowers uh and majorities have uh have been made weak by guilt over their power.
	Guilt about their power, guilt about their pasts and uh and guilt at the uh the the unfair advantage they have over the peons of the world.
	And so when the peons of the world erupt and start killing people in superpower or Western democracy countries, it is, well, you know, maybe we deserve this, the way we've treated the world all these years, and we've got a leftist uh uh uh contingent throughout the world and this country too, that promulgates and promotes that whole concept uh in classrooms and so forth.
	Another question asked by J. Pod what if this triumph of universalism is demonstrated by the left's insistence that American and Israeli military actions, marked by an extraordinary concern for preventing civilian casualties, are in fact unacceptably brutal.
	And if it also apparent, is also apparent in the right's claim that a war against a country has nothing to do with the people, but only with that country's leaders.
	Can any war be won when this is the nature of the discussion in the countries fighting the war?
	Can any war be won when one of the combatants voluntarily limits itself in this manner?
	Could World War II have been won by Britain and the U.S. if the two countries did not have it in them to firebomb Dresden and uh and and drop the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
	Well, uh no, I don't mean this to be cutting of J-Pod.
	We discussed all this on this program last week uh and even the uh the week before.
	It discussed it in many ways.
	I asked it, what is the will of the American people?
	Uh where all this is concerned.
	Uh fascinating interview yesterday, by the way, with Ralph Peters, uh uh, which will uh be in the next issue of the Limbaugh Letter, and I'm probably going to cut it up and uh tempt you, tease you with some audio excerpts of uh of this interview because his brilliant man, and he is a great writer.
	Uh he also echoed many of the sentiments I have.
	He just went on and on and on about the greatness of the American people, and when finally pushed to the limit, you can always count on him.
	You can count on Main Street, small town, middle America, to always do the right thing.
	He doesn't believe that's changed.
	Uh he thinks that represents a majority of the country's thinking.
	He, of course, had effusive praise for the men and women of the armed forces of which he uh was a former member.
	Uh but still, there are there are new constraints on countries like the United States and Israel when it comes to waging war, even after you've been attacked.
	Uh and everybody's asking the question, uh, and has been in the case of Israel.
	They really have the they have the guts to be the old Israelis of the past.
	And it look at look at those tanks moving now.
	Uh It it it looks like uh the Israelis haven't changed at all.
	This is heartwarming news uh because Israel's fighting this war for us.
	You know, they're this is a they're doing this for our sake as well as for theirs.
	Let me take a quick timeout here, folks.
	Sit tight, we'll be back and continue.
	But get there's a great story out today from the Harris poll.
	Fifty percent of U.S. citizens say that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, and that is up from thirty-six percent last year.
	And listen to this line.
	Polsters deemed the increase both substantial and surprising in light of persistent press reports to the contrary in recent years.
	Well, what does that tell you about most Americans' reliance on persistent press reports?
	It means that they doubt them.
	It means that they don't trust them.
	I wonder if that will sink in to the Harris people as they analyze their own poll.
	All right, brief timeout.
	Back with much more in a second, folks.
	Something else remarkable.
	The editor of maybe the publisher, and I I didn't print the story.
	I thought I printed the story, but I apparently didn't because I don't have it in the stack here.
	The editor-publisher of the largest newspaper in Germany has called the Europeans a bunch of cowards.
	He's called them a bunch of cowards, and what reminded me of it is I'm uh just saw a little crawl on the TV.
	Europeans require ceasefire before sending in uh any members of some peacekeeping force.
	The Germans get this.
	The Germans said we will only go in if Hezbos promise not to shoot at us.
	And they and the and the Germans said this after the editor of their largest newspaper, and I can't even remember the name of the newspaper, basically called the Europeans uh a bunch of cowards.
	Here's another interesting piece on this.
	This is from uh Greg Richards at one of our favorite blogs, as you know, the American thinker, Israel being set up in the world's media to meet an impossible standard to its critics if Israel does not instantly destroy all of the Hesbos and its fixed installations, and that instant has now already passed, and do it without taking any casualties itself or inflicting any collateral damage on the other side, then it is failed.
	By this peculiar standard, any country that has ever fought a war has lost it after the first week.
	But it should surprise no one that this standard is only applied to Israel and the United States.
	It abs it's an absurd standard and a and a defeatist one.
	Having set the rules of the game so as to ensure failure, critics then commence laying blame on the country, which is presumed guilty merely by being who and what it is.
	The uh victim of unprovoked attacks is thus guilty of a disproportionate response.
	Eliminating military installations hidden among civilians, such as uh hiding being a war crime itself, by the way, uh becomes an attack on civilians.
	Such guilt mongering is not simply wrong, it's also camouflage designed to divert attention away from the party, which bears far greater responsibility.
	And there is a person.
	There is a person that is responsible for the devastation, both in Israel and Lebanon, and that person is the Secretary General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan.
	This is Kofi's war, writes Mr. Richards.
	Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000 under the guarantee of a UN resolution that the border area would not be remilitarized.
	Uh the responsible agent of that guarantee is Kofi Annan.
	Uh you know, it's it's I love these guys.
	I love all these guys because they contribute to our broad-based knowledge and intellect.
	Uh, but it's I must say, and I know I this is tough, but it's really it it's tough to see so much of what has already been said on this program in past weeks pop up days and even uh even weeks later.
	A little bit more from this poll uh from the Harris people on the American public and their perceptions of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
	Not only do uh 50 percent of Americans say that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, up from 36 percent who thought so a year ago.
	Respondents were questioned early uh in early July after the release of a Defense Department intelligence report that revealed coalition forces recovered about five hundred aging chemical weapons containing mustard or sarin uh nerve gas agents in Iraq.
	The Harris poll also offered some positive feedback on Iraq.
	Seventy-two percent of respondents said that the Iraqi people are better off now than under Saddam's regime.
	Fi uh figure similar to that of 2004 when it stood at 76%.
	Uh sixty-four percent say that Saddam had strong links with Al Qaeda, up from sixty-two percent in October of two thousand four.
	Now, I don't know what you think of this is this is something that uh uh to me is remarkable in the sense that the drive-by media has made its living the past two or three years trying to create poll results that would be just the opposite of that.
	Um Washington Post today, Dana Milbank, fascinating story.
	Everybody trying to figure out who this is.
	For one Senate candidate, the R is a scarlet letter.
	A candidate immersed in one of the most competitive Senate races in the country, sat down to lunch yesterday with reporters at a Capitol Hill Steakhouse and shared his views about this year's political currents on the Iraq War.
	It didn't work.
	We didn't prepare for the peace.
	On the response to Hurricane Katrina, a monumental failure of government.
	On the national mood, there's a palpable frustration right now in the country.
	It's all fairly standard Democratic boilerplate, except that this candidate is a Republican.
	And he's getting all kinds of cooperation from the White House, the Republican National Committee, and GOP congressional leaders.
	Not that he necessarily wants it either.
	Well, you know, I don't know, the candidate said when asked if he wanted President Bush to campaign for him.
	Noting Bush's low standing in his home state, he finally added, to be honest with you, I probably prefer he not show up here.
	The candidate gave the luncheon briefing to nine reporters from newspapers, magazines, and networks under the condition that he be identified only as a GOP Senate candidate.
	When it was uh pressed to go on the record, his campaign toyed with the idea but got cold feet.
	He was anxious enough to air his gripes, but cautious enough to avoid a public brawl with the White House.
	Well, maybe for a while.
	Let me tell you that the aftermath of this story, the blowback of this story, is gonna be bigger than the story itself.
	Still, his willingness to speak so critically, if anonymously about the party that he'll represent on election day points to a growing sense among Republicans that if they are to retain their majorities in Congress, they may have to throw the president under the train in all but the safest, reddest states.
	All right.
	Now, who do you suppose this might be?
	Who is a Republican who is in a close, close race.
	Uh he is uh doesn't want the White House's help.
	The first name that came to my mind.
	You think it's you think it's Santorum.
	The first name that comes to your mind.
	First name that came to my mind was Link Chafey.
	But that was too easy.
	That's too easy.
	The other one of Santorum was the one who came to my mind after I rejected Link Chafee.
	Um, you have to understand something.
	Any senator, any candidate who will do this wants it known that it was him at some point.
	You can't keep this.
	This is this is gonna be a parlor guessing game in Washington for about ten minutes till everybody figures it all out.
	Uh and and then it's uh it's gonna it's gonna light all kinds of fires.
	This is red meat to the drive-by media.
	They just love this.
	A senator who wants nothing to do with the president, this will be clear illustration to them.
	The Republicans are in trouble.
	Uh I don't know.
	I've I who else is up?
	I mean, there's the there are more Democrats that need to protect their seats this year than the Republicans, but I can't think of anybody else.
	I haven't even really gone to the list to look at who might be uh uh in a in a similar tight race uh in a state where the president is not doing well.
	Uh you know, is well, you know, you can say that the drive-by media won't reveal the senator's name, uh, but the senator granted the interview.
	The senator said, I'll tell you whatever you want as long as you don't identify uh me.
	Uh it is interesting to me, though, uh, ladies and gentlemen, that They've just got a huge leak here.
	They just had a source close to the election, uh, one of the candidates dump all over his party and dump all over the president, and the media is willing to keep the secret.
	The media will not reveal his name.
	The media will not betray his trust.
	They have no problem revealing how we track terrorists.
	They have no problem revealing any other state secret.
	Any other leak they get from the Pentagon, the CIA or the State Department, they're all over the place with it.
	Uh but in this game, they're willing to keep the secret.
	And I I I wonder why, ladies and gentlemen.
	Well, because they know that it's how long do you think it'll be before this senator's identified?
	That'll be it's it's it I mean officially, officially identified.
	Because you this afternoon is probably when it's going to happen.
	If it weren't, if it weren't for all, you know, Maliki at the White House today from Iraq and uh all the the increased bombardment, this story'd be getting a little bit bigger play in the drive-by media than it is, but believe me, they're all having uh what they're drinking lunch right now, and I guarantee you they're all discussing it and figuring out where to go with it.
	Well, hell's a popping over this now.
	Who is this Senate candidate?
	I read the story, doesn't it say anything about the Senate candidate being an incumbent.
	Um people are throwing around the well, how about how come could it be Michael DeWine in Ohio?
	I mean, he's probably a little angry at uh George W. Bush.
	Uh there's a popular consensus out there, however, ladies and gentlemen, that it is Michael Steele, the uh lieutenant governor of Maryland, who is uh is running for the Senate in Maryland, Maryland, a big blue state, Bush's numbers way down there.
	And of course, if Steele is to win, uh he's he's gonna have to reflect certain uh thoughts and characteristics of a uh majority of the population there.
	Uh and so he decides to call the White House or the Capitol Press Corps, the uh DC drive-by media, and have this lunch in Washington, and uh and and uh it the theory is that it's uh he's got to maintain his credibility.
	He is uh if he's if he's gonna run with a capital R behind his name, he's got to acknowledge that there are um uh several problems in doing so in the state of Maryland.
	Others have thrown out the name Jim Talent uh in Missouri.
	Uh so uh but uh I don't think anybody knows for certain uh unless somebody does know and wants to let me know that that's uh here let me check something real quick here, folks.
	Um just got a super secret email from a source I can't identify.
	The White House has tracked this back to being Michael Steele.
	The White House compared Frist's schedule with a number of uh of other things.
	Um and and uh so throw out the stuff about it being Santorum.
	The White House is convinced uh that it is Michael Steele, Lieutenant Governor of Maryland.
	Well, this is there there's gonna be some aftermath and uh and uh and blowback from this uh as a result of it.
	And the nine members of the drive-by media, let's see how long they can keep this uh a secret who were there.
	Dana Milbank and the Washington Post has written about it.
	Here, by the way, is the piece that I didn't print out.
	It's by Matthias Dapfner, the CEO of Axel Springer, A. G. He's chief executive of the German publisher, Axel Springer, uh, and he read they wrote a blistering attack in Duelt, uh Germany's largest daily paper against the timid reaction of Europe in the face of the Islamic threat.
	Uh must read, it says here a few days ago, Henry Broder wrote in Welt on Suntag, Europe your family name is appeasement.
	It's a phrase you can't get out of your head because it's so terribly true.
	But his point is Europe, thy name is cowardice.
	And this is uh the uh CEO of the largest publishing unit in uh in Germany, uh Williamstown, Kentucky.
	We'll start with you on the phones today.
	Ned, welcome.
	Nice to have you with us, sir.
	Uh, thanks for uh talking to me, Russ.
	Appreciate it.
	You bet.
	Um I just my my comment was um I'm in the army and I I see on TV, reading the paper, whatever, um how the Israeli Lebanese conflict with Hezbollah, whatever.
	They you know, the international community, like I don't know, makes us look like the bad people when we have to Attack um a civilian area where the enemy stores weapons, soldiers, stuff like that.
	And kind of the how they demonize the Israeli army for destroying these sites when they're being shot at.
	They are they're obviously caches for enemy weapons.
	And but they don't demonize them for doing so, you know, putting anti-aircraft on top of hospitals and stuff, which is against the law of land warfare.
	Um why doesn't the international community say, hey, you know.
	Just up in war saying you they are the reason for the death for the civilians.
	More and more of them are.
	Uh those those who aren't are um uh doing so simply because of their I think it's all it's it's two things.
	Um two basic things.
	There there's just a general hatred for Western democracies uh among much of the world, and Israel uh gets added into that also because they're Jewish and there is anti Semitism.
	The United Nation is the is the uh the breeding ground and the and the modern day repository for uh uh anti Semitism, as is much of Europe.
	France, you can't you wouldn't believe the level of anti Semitism there.
	So there's there's no question that that's part of it.
	But you've got more and more people now that are starting to see this another way.
	It's not as universal as it used to be, even to the extent the Arab nations uh in that region have condemned Hezbollah uh as as well.
	In fact, in Israel's an interesting study.
	You know, Israel is a very, very liberal bunch of people.
	Israel's a very socially liberal comp uh country.
	Uh and and in this instance, however, it's fascinating uh a couple of the uh the biggest liberal social political leaders, not elected, but just commentators and so forth in that country are one hundred percent behind this action.
	Public opinion polls in Israel show that ninety percent of Israelis are all for what the Israelis are doing.
	And uh I I I go back to what I said last week.
	There's a whole bunch of positive stuff in this.
	And it's it's uh you know spend the whole day here recounting it, but among some of the things that are positive, terrorist techniques are now being learned and and discovered, and they're not being supported.
	There's a there's a call from the United Nations, we gotta stop this humanitarian blasting.
	This is this is a blasting of innocent civilians in the world is here to wait a minute, they're driving around in ambulances.
	They are they're launching missiles out of homes.
	Uh terrorist tactics are being widely disseminated here and widely seen uh for what they are.
	Uh one of the rules of war you mentioned, Ned, uh hiding is illegal.
	You're not allowed to hide among civilians and this sort of thing, uh, and they're doing it and they're being called on it, and the Israelis are being the Israelis that we've always known they are.
	When they find out where these people are, they're going and getting them.
	And uh they'll with they'll they'll deal with the PR fallout that they're killing innocent civilians, civilians, because they know what they're doing and they know who they're targeting and they know who they're killing.
	And it's by design.
	So um it's I I think all in all, this is a this is a huge positive that's happening here.
	And people who said yesterday, wait a minute, you got it you give them a week.
	They've they they've got to get this done in a week, or it's a failure.
	Uh if if Hezbollah survives uh even with just f uh a shell of its former self, if Israel doesn't totally wipe them out, why it's considered a defeat for Israel.
	There have people who've been people who move the goalposts that way.
	And it it it is seductive.
	It it it uh uh it does in fact it even uh drew me in, and I'll tell you why I fell for it, and I'm embarrassed to admit that I did, but I fell for it on the basis that it's all PR.
	But the reality on the ground is how wars are won and lost.
	And a lot of people are very concerned about the PR.
	Well, Hezbollah can say they won when they lost.
	Just like the Democrats, it's a moral victory when they lose by four points in a Republican district, they run around saying, eh, the Republicans ought to be worried about this, but they're still losing elections.
	Well, the point here, Israel is still winning this battle.
	The PR can say one thing, but this is an indication of just how much people get wrapped up in imagery and spin and uh and and PR and ignore the reality of things.
	And I can cite countless examples of this throughout our culture, throughout our business world, throughout the media world.
	Um there are I'm not gonna name them, but I can't tell you the number of television and radio shows that in reality have no audience worth speaking of.
	But if you read certain media, you think they're the biggest thing is going for a host of reasons.
	So they survive on the buzz.
	They survive on buzz, but they're not really winning anything, and they're not really earning a whole lot of money, which is the definition of going into business, is one of the reasons you do it.
	But the the uh spin, nevertheless, makes it look like they're hot, makes it look like they're huge.
	And this is what the terrorists have learned, be it Al-Qaeda or the Hezbows, or whoever have learned about our media.
	They are caught up in spin, they have their own agendas, they do have an interest in the outcome of events, and if they can spin the outcome of an event uh into an alternative reality, uh they'll do so.
	Such as they try it constantly with the U.S. economy, talking about how rotten it is, supleine America.
	And they they're hell-bent on creating crisis after crisis after crisis.
	They want people in the throes of doom and gloom.
	They want people thinking pessimistically.
	Because when you're thinking pessimistically, you'll vote for change.
	And that's what this is all about.
	Well, you factor in with the Israel and the Hisbos, you factor in that there is a natural-born hatred for Israel uh at the United Nations, in much of the American left, by the way, and certainly in lots of uh of Western and Eastern Europe.
	Uh and the Israelis don't play the PR game, and a lot of people get frustrated by that.
	A lot of people get frustrated when a lot of their allies, friends, associates don't respond to the PR game.
	And it it it boils down to what world you want to live in.
	Do you want to live in the real world when you win the war, you've won it.
	You've beat back the bad guys, you've limited their ability or destroyed their ability to wage war on you.
	Or do you want to win the PR war where you don't really accomplish anything, but the world loves you.
	And in this case, for Israel, what it would require for the world to love them is to actually be marched into the Mediterranean Sea, which they know, but they're not going to fall for it.
	But a lot of people throughout our society, in all levels of business, everywhere you go, get sucked in by the notion of winning the spin, winning the um uh the PR battle.
	And in this case, the Israelis are eschewing that for substantive victory and substantive reality.
	And uh thank God for it.
	I think uh the people in life that you can trust and the people in life that you can count on are the people who have both feet firmly planted in reality, because all the rest are a bunch of phony baloney, plastic banana, good time rock and rollers who can't stand the light of reality shining on them.
	Ha, welcome back, folks.
	Great to have you.
	El Rushbose Serving Humanity, America's real anchor man here on the one and only excellence in broadcasting network.
	All right.
	Pretty much confirmed now that the uh comments made in that luncheon to Dana Milbank and eight other reporters were made by Lieutenant Governor Michael Steele, Republican in uh Maryland, seeking a Senate seat there.
	Uh and it's uh it's quite you know, it's it's it's sort of fascinating.
	I I still like the guy.
	I I was I was telling uh Snerdley the other day, what was it?
	who was it in this case that just Bush has been nice as hell it was in that specter again but I can't think of who else we were talking about Uh uh the point the difference here, I don't know I'm not I'm not uh it's because I'm just not aware.
	I don't know if the White House is offered Steele any assistance.
	I I don't I don't know if they're out there doing things.
	You say they are.
	Um, you know, the the loyalty cuts both ways.
	Uh it it really does.
	If you're Michael Steele and you're running for the Senate, first time Republican, and don't forget Maryland is not a Democrat state.
	Maryland is a far-left kook fringe state.
	I mean, it could be the capital of of the of the of the Democrat Looney Tune blog Cooksville.
	Uh it's not just a Democrat state, and he's running there as a as a Republican.
	But the um, you know, the Republican Party, the White House, they've they've done their best to undercut Catherine Harris in her Senate uh in her Senate run.
	Pat Toomey, who opposed Arlen Specter, uh, was Actively opposed by the uh by the White House.
	So if you're Michael Steele and you're looking at this, uh and and you uh you're running for office in a in a state that, as I say, is far left state, not a Democrat state, uh, and then you watch the White House, you know, giving aid to people like Lincoln Chafee uh and and Spector, uh, but blowing off Catherine Harris uh and and and Pat Toomey in that primary.
	Um I think Steele's probably distancing himself here because he thinks he can't win otherwise, given the state uh in which he's uh is running.
	I I'm not sure that he needed to go to this extent to do it.
	Uh this is uh I don't know what what kind of thinking was involved in this, uh, but he obviously did it on purpose.
	He obviously wants this discussion taking place here.
	He wants it known that it was him.
	I mean, you have to you can't go to dinner with nine reporters or lunch with nine reporters in Washington, D.C. and say, hey, look, gang, this is off the record.
	My identity's off the record, and expect it to uh stay off the record.
	Now get this.
	The Iraqi Prime Minister is in Washington, had a joint press conference with President Bush today.
	It was very diplomatic, by the way.
	Uh, and he I guess he's going to address a joint session of Congress.
	And three Democrats, Rosa Deloro, Jan Shikowski, uh, and I think uh Senator Turbin from Illinois have all sent a letter demanding that uh to to Hastert saying, cancel this speech.
	We don't want this guy, this new Prime Minister in Iraq polluting the House of Representatives.
	And the uh and and this whole um uh joint session stuff.
	We don't we don't want this.
	And the reason that they're doing this, the reason they're saying this, is because uh uh Al Maliki, the uh Iraqi Prime Minister has publicly taken positions which oppose the United States, uh, particularly in the Hezbollah and and Israel conflict.
	In addition to that, uh he's also created a little bit of uh dander uh by asking the uh White House to have the right for Iraqis to try American servicemen who commit quote unquote war crimes.
	Now the administration is saying, hey, you know, this proves that they're their own government, that they're establishing their own government, and that's what we set out to do.
	Uh the Democrats are saying, wait a minute, you said they were gonna be an ally.
	You said that they were gonna be supportive.
	You said the reason for going in there was to get somebody that was sympathetic and pro-American in that region, and this guy's not doing that.
	I still find it amazing that they want to shut him up and they don't want to let him come in and speak.
	Typical Democrats, First Amendment is for everybody but them.
	They'll grant all kinds of rights to terrorists.
	They'll make sure terrorists get lawyers, they'll make sure terrorists have the rights to uh uh our Constitution.
	He'll make sure we can't spy on terrorists to find out when their next hit's gonna be.
	But let the duly elected Prime Minister of Iraq show up, speak to a joint session of Congress.
	Oh way.
	We're not gonna let that man come in here and speak because he's not on the same page with the United States.
	Quickly to Rockville, Maryland.
	Steve, welcome to the EIB network.
	Hi.
	Rush mega conservative dittoes from a conservative exile in the People's Republic of Maryland.
	Thank you, sir.
	Um here's my take on this whole situation.
	Um I'm having a hard time believing that this is Michael Steele for two reasons.
	Number one, he really is a man of high moral character.
	The second reason is that uh you talk about Bush being receiving scathing attacks.
	His whatever tax he has received pale in comparison to what Michael Steele has received.
	Don't you think that this gives him the moral high ground?
	And if so, then if he has that moral high ground, why does he need to do this?
	And that's what baffles me.
	And I gotta tell you that if it turns out to be true, uh he's got some explaining to do because I'm planning on voting for him, but I really, you know, th this is what's my guess is I'll tell you something.
	You said something very interesting.
	My guess he wants to explain this.
	And this this this you know, if this is an accident, if this is if if this just cannot be something that happened coincidentally.
	There's got to be a strategy behind this.
	Uh the the best information that that we've assembled here is uh says that it is Michael Steele, so you I think you should brace yourself for that.
	He's obviously not going to be asked about it, and uh and he does and by the way, Santorum's office called us.
	I need to spend more time on the bit that flat out denied this.
	Uh, so they have uh nothing in common with whatever this uh person said to these media reporters about President Bush.
	Back in just a second, folks.
	The first of three exciting hours officially in the can.
	We'll be back and wrap it up and continue with the next hour in just a second.

▲