Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Wowie Zowie!
Did John Boehner fire a shot in Washington yesterday?
Holy cow!
Hubba Hubbard, you don't know what I'm talking about?
Well, of course, it is the Limbaugh echo syndrome, but when it comes from an elected Republican, that's good.
Whoo, baby.
Democrats called out and their reaction is quite illustrative.
Greetings.
Ladies and gentlemen, a real American anchor man is on the air.
Rush Limbaugh, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, over 600 great radio stations, 22 million people tuning in, and three full hours of broadcast excellence.
We'll be talking to you at some point during the program.
Telephone number 800-282-2882, the email address rush at EIBNet.com.
We have coming up on the program today, Robert Novak calling out Richard Armitage, saying Armitage has not been forthcoming and honest about his role in the whole plane leak affair.
This movie on the assassination of George W. Bush has found an American distributor now, and it will play in this country prior to the election.
That's good.
It's despicable, and it's sickening, but politically, that's good.
While the movie is airing in Toronto, and while they have plans to air it in the United States of America, Kellogg's is getting hell for doing a television commercial showing a person riding a dog.
A television commercial showing a person riding a dog has caused all kinds of outrage and demands the commercial be pulled.
There hasn't been one such demand that I know of for the movie showing George W. Bush assassinated in Chicago.
So a movie showing the president assassinated is outraging people.
A commercial in the U.K. showing a person riding a dog.
Kellogg's commercial is causing outrage.
New ABC news poll that shows the whole issue of terrorism is becoming more and more important to the American people.
The Saudis are saying that we only have tapped 18% of our global oil supplies.
We're 140 years of oil out there.
It's the CI Told You So, been telling you this for the longest time.
Another Democrat went on the Oprah show yesterday, Jim McGreevy, in anticipation of his big tell-all book coming out.
This couldn't be playing out better.
We got Democrats doing movies about assassinating the president, writing books about it.
We got McGreevy out there going public on Oprah.
Crowd audience not really crazy about it.
A lot going on out there.
It's really exciting, and the Democrats are continuing, I think, what is a slow but sure implosion.
Let's go to the big fireworks story that erupted in Washington yesterday.
This is late yesterday on Capitol Hill.
The Republican House leader, John Boehner, responds to Senator Dingy Harry's comments that he had made earlier that morning, yesterday morning, on the floor of the Senate on the president's 9-11 speech.
Here is a portion of Boehner's remarks.
This is what got the fur flying all day yesterday in Washington.
Sometimes, based on the votes that get cast, you wonder whether they're more interested in the rights of the terrorists than in protecting the American people.
Oh, man.
Now, we've said this constantly on this program, but here's John Boehner out there saying it.
What is there to dispute about this?
These are the people that try to shut down the surveillance program.
These are the people that applauded when they thought they killed the Patriot Act.
These are the people that are trying to bestow upon al-Qaeda a constitutional bill of rights.
These are the people that want to continue to fight this as though it's a law enforcement issue.
These are the people who can't stand the term Islamofascist being used because they're afraid it might offend the Islamofascists.
Here is Dingy Harry's response.
Haven't we moved beyond that?
Haven't we moved beyond the Republicans are more religious than Democrats?
Haven't we moved beyond the fact that Republicans are trying to save us from the terrorists and Democrats aren't?
I think we've moved beyond that.
You may wish to have moved beyond it, but we haven't, Dingy Harry.
Just indicted yourself.
Haven't we moved beyond the Republicans are more religious than Democrats?
Who is it that every week is mounting a new effort to try to connect with religious voters?
Who is it that's trying to come up with a values-based campaign?
Who is it that's out there trying to come up with another way after previous failures of showing Christians that they don't hold them in disrespect when in fact they do?
They constantly impugn them and make fun of them, and yet when elections roll around, they come up with these plans to go out there and smoke the peace pipe, so to speak.
Move beyond the fact that Republicans are trying to save us from the terrorists and Democrats aren't.
We are at war, Denji Harry.
And every time the president makes a comment about the war on terror, you people go ballistic and say we need to get out of Iraq and we need to do this and we need to do that.
You pass resolutions in the Senate.
You vote on them.
Well, you authorize resolutions, but you can't pass them to get out of Iraq.
It's clear as day to anybody that watches that the Democrats are trying to undermine victory against this enemy.
There is no question about it.
It is why I said on the radio a long time ago, I'm through lobbing softballs and walking on eggshells when discussing patriotism.
What in the world is patriotic about people who are invested in our defeat?
Now, they may say, well, we're not invested in our defeat, but we think President Bush is wrong and we want to defeat his policy.
What's the difference?
If the president's policy is victory over the enemy, the Islamo fascists, and you oppose that, who cares what your reasoning is?
Why do we sit around and have to say, no, we're only questioning your judgment?
The Democrats know they've been hit here.
They don't want the president sounding strong.
They don't want the Republican Party sounding strong.
They can't even stand the term Islamofascist to be used.
What does that matter?
What is the whole problem with using the term Islamofascist?
Why in the world make that an issue?
They afraid it's going to offend the world?
Is it going to offend our enemies?
Why make such a big deal out of interrogations at Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib?
They're afraid of offending somebody?
It surely gives the impression they're not interested in winning.
Boehner has nailed it here, folks, and you can tell, as I've always told you, watch the reaction to people who've been criticized.
Watch the reaction.
They act like stuck pigs, then you have hit the bullseye.
Let's go back Friday, December 16th of 2005.
This is after the vote on the Patriot Act, Dingy Harry talking to the press.
Think of what happened 20 minutes ago in the United States Senate.
We killed the Patriot Act.
The Patriot Act.
Yeah, they're caught.
Yeah, yeah.
Oh, yeah, we killed the Patriot Act.
They're applauding.
Not quite a year ago, what did the Patriot Act do?
The Patriot Act is what tore down the wall that the Clinton administration had built that prevented various agencies like the CIA and the FBI from sharing intelligence and information that they had learned.
The Patriot Act tore that down.
These people wanted to kill it.
They thought they had, and a huge round of applause.
They have mischaracterized the FISA situation, the NSA foreign surveillance program.
They continue to refer to it as a domestic spy program, as though Bush voyeurishly wants to just spy on you for his own titillation.
I don't know.
People must not listen to themselves.
This morning on the House floor during one-minute speeches, Georgia Democrat John Lewis.
Mr. Speaker, the statement by Majority Leader Boehner was shameful and disgraceful.
To suggest my fellow Democrats care more about protecting the terrorists than the American people is not right.
It is not fair.
It is not just.
It is not the American way.
Democrats will not stand by and let a single attack go unanswered.
You may play the politics of fear, but this dog will not hunt.
This dog just will not hunt.
Well, you want to bet this dog will hunt.
This dog is already hunting, and this dog has already found its prey.
That's what this means.
Compare something here.
Note the contrast.
Here, the Republicans come out and they criticize the Democrats.
Boehner does of seeming to be more interested in the rights of terrorists and protecting the American people.
They start squealing like a bunch of little kids.
Look at the way Bush reacts to all of the lies that the Democrats have told about him for five years.
Does he run around squealing, you can't do that?
You know, get with it, Democrats.
You're playing in a big leagues, and you are going to be criticized and characterized for the things that you do and you say.
This is all timed perfectly as the election season gins up.
We've got a brief break.
There are more audio sound bites on all of this, including a couple great ones from Tony Snow.
Sit tight.
We'll be right back and move right on.
Half my brain tied behind my back.
Just to make it fair, Rush Limbaugh, having more fun than a human being, should be allowed to head back to our audio soundbite roster.
Washington exploding on fire over John Boehner's comments yesterday, essentially saying that sometimes you wonder whether the Democrats are more interested in the rights of the terrorists than they are in protecting the American people.
On the CBS early show this morning, the commentator Bob Schieffer appeared, also their chief Washington correspondent, co-host Harry Smith, asked him a question.
I'm going to talk about President Bush.
Spent the last part of two and a half weeks talking about the war on terror.
Even on the night of 9-11, still talking about the war on terror.
And what else are you going to talk about on 9-11?
What was 9-11?
Are we to understand here that bringing up the war on terror on 9-11 is somehow playing politics?
Yes.
I guess we are.
His question to Schieffer, is this going to help those Republicans or is it going to hurt them?
The fallout since the president's speech has just been extraordinary.
You had John Boehner, the Republican leader in the House yesterday, saying that he was beginning to wonder if Democrats were more interested in protecting terrorists than they were in protecting Americans.
I mean, it's going to get low and it's going to get mean, and we're already seeing it.
Whoa, it's going to get low?
It's going to get mean, Bob.
We got a movie coming to this country about assassinating President Bush because of this.
Because of the war on terror.
What do you mean, Bob?
It's going to get mean, and it's going to get low.
What the Democrats say each and every day about Bush and the Republicans is just one long, mean, nasty, hateful diatribe, and they've been doing it for years, Bob.
You know, these Democrats, they can take it or dish it out, but they cannot take it.
They can dish out all some of the most disgusting, vile stuff.
And you know what, folks?
This is getting disgusting.
It's gotten to the point now where it's even beyond disgusting.
It's gotten to the point the Democrats ought to be ashamed of themselves.
If they want to oppose certain things, there are ways to do it.
They're making it personal.
And they are actually, hey, how about all this talk that Bush is the real terrorist?
You know, Democrats aren't saying that.
Bush is creating terrorism.
Why, there weren't any terrorists before he went into Iraq and before 9-11 on Bush.
Bush is making Bush.
Who was it just yesterday?
The Boston Globe, Bob.
The Boston Globe yesterday editorialized that Bush is going to end up being worse for the country than the terror attacks of 9-11.
But what do you mean, Bob?
It's going to get low and going to get mean.
Let's move on to the Today Show Today.
Brand new hostette Meredith Vieira talking with Tim Russert.
And she said, Democrats say the president took advantage of the very solemn occasion in this country to push his agenda about Iraq and tie it to the greater war on terror.
House Speaker criticizing Democrats for criticizing the president, saying he's soft on terrorism.
That's worked effectively for the Republicans in the past, that argument.
You think it still worked, Tim?
The words that Congressman Boehner used, almost suggesting the Democrats are aligning themselves with the terrorists, really sent shockwaves through Washington.
You can accuse people of not being vigorous or strong on national defense and national security, but when you start suggesting that they are closer to the terrorists than they are to protecting the American people, I think people in both parties think that's crossed the line.
Where, Tim?
Maybe a few Republicans in Washington, like Link Chafee and Lindsey Graham and John McCain.
Let me tell you something.
This resonates outside the country, outside the Beltway.
I don't think the inside the Beltway crowd, particularly Republicans, has any idea how livid the American people are and have been consistently with the mean-spirited criticisms of Bush, the outright lies, the movies wishing for his assassination.
Let's make no mistake.
Why else do the movie unless you're wishing for it to be true?
And they've, you know, cable television networks have gone out and gotten art and movie professors and asked them to condemn it, and they won't do it.
They won't condemn the art.
No, no, no, no.
Well, I'd like to see the reaction if we actually did the EIB production of the kidnapping and beheading of Bill Clinton.
I'd like to see what they would react to and how they would react to that.
And this assassination movie is just one of the things.
There was an assassination book two years ago in the 2004 campaign.
Since that didn't work, now they're doing an assassination movie.
Neither of these have been condemned.
People in the country are fed up and livid with the fact that the New York Times is giving away secrets that would help us win the war on terror.
People hate the New York Times.
They despise the New York Times.
They're not happy with the Washington Post or many else in the drive-by media.
The people of this country are outraged every time they have to listen to Dick Durbin or Ted Kennedy or John Kerry talk about how we're mistreating the people that want to kill us, the Islamo fascists that want to kill us and how they ought to be having constitutional rights.
The people of this country are fed up with the ACLU and liberal Clinton judges in Michigan saying the president is acting as commander-in-chief in an unconstitutional fashion.
You better bet your bippy people are upset.
And this is by no means anything.
This is simply a confirmation of what a lot of Americans think.
Now we go to Tony Snow.
He was on American Morning today with Miles O'Brien.
We've got a couple sound bites here.
Miles O'Brien first questioned.
Not long after that speech, the majority leader John Boehner said what he said about the Democrats being more interested in protecting terrorists than the American people.
Not a lot of unity in that statement, is there?
Rather than focusing on John Boehner's statement, you got one statement from a Republican.
Think of Carl Levin going on your net.
Can I ask about Republicans first, though, let's get our timing right because the moment the president gave his speech, boom, people are hitting the send button already hurling accusations.
Now, what John Boehner was doing is he was musing and he was asking tough questions.
For instance, in listening to people who want to go ahead and kill Americans, the terror surveillance program, the president has asked both parties to join together to do this, a perfect way of expressing unity.
And instead, what I get is Democrats saying how offended they were either by the president's speech or by Representative Boehner's comments.
Exactly right.
They don't want to talk about their position on the issue.
They don't want to talk about their position on the war on terror.
The Democrats do not want George W. Bush or Republicans reminding this country of the threat that exists from Islamic fascists.
In fact, they don't even want those words spoken.
Feingold's running around acting like a stuck pig.
Don't call them Islamofascists.
Why not?
Because they don't want those people to be perceived as the enemy, Bush to be perceived as the enemy.
It's what they hated about the path to 9-11.
The path to 9-11 doesn't fit the template of Bush being the enemy.
They want Bush and the Republicans to be the enemy, not the true and real enemy that we face, the Islamofascists.
They certainly don't want Bush reminding the world he's trying to deal with that threat, while the Democrats talk of withdrawal and appeasement and cutting and running.
And now with McGreevy on Oprah, they're talking about their sex lives.
One more bite here.
Miles O'Brien says, is the president a little concerned that his majority leader was basically ignoring his call for unity?
That's not a unifying statement by any means.
Well, again, Miles, you're asking a question in a vacuum.
Within moments of the president finishing his address to the nation, the head of the Democratic Senatorial Committee, the head of the Democratic House Committee, and Senator Kennedy were.
I just want you to talk about Republicans for a moment.
I see.
Forget the Democrats for the first time.
Just come up.
You know what it sounds like, Miles?
I hate to tell you this.
Yeah.
But sometimes in politics, people make tough arguments.
It happens.
The president's been called a liar and a loser by the guy who's the top Democrat in the United States Senate.
Does he worry about it?
No.
No, he doesn't worry about it.
That's a grand slam home run.
I'm Miles O'Brien.
I don't want to talk about Democrats.
Of course, you don't want to talk about Democrats because they're indefensible.
You want to try to indict Republicans.
Well, you put your little toe in the water, Miles, and the lake froze.
And you couldn't get out.
The president's been called worse than a liar and a loser by Denji Harry and other Democrats.
Does he worry about it?
No.
Does he run around acting like a little child stuck with a little pinprint?
Nope, not whatsoever.
Just goes about doing his business.
Democrats, a bunch of spoiled, rotten kids who cannot deal with the truth about them being articulated on broadcast.
Back in a moment.
Hey, look, ladies and gentlemen, as you know, there is a supposedly moving closer to the mainstream bunch of people that believe George Bush blew up the World Trade Center.
And this is becoming more and more mainstream, we're told.
Despite the fact that Popular Mechanics has written a huge magazine article and a whole book debunking every charge they make, college professors, liberal entertainers, Democrats all over the place are coming to the belief that the World Trade Center was blown up by Bush.
Now, the terrorists flew the planes in there, but Bush was in on that too.
And Osama took credit for it, but that was all to hide what Bush and Cheney did.
Bush and Cheney wanted to blow up the World Trade Center so they could start a war against Islamofascists and corner the market in oil.
And so this is becoming more and more mainstream.
Now, who's saying this?
What political party and ideological persuasion believes this rot gut?
Liberal Democrats.
And they wonder why in the world John Boehner would say what he's saying.
It is Democrats becoming more and more mainstream now who are accusing George W. Bush of blowing up the World Trade Center, killing 3,000 Americans, doing movies and books on Bush's assassination.
And now there's a story from the Associated Press out there.
They're covering Hugo Chavez.
He's saying the 9-11 conspiracy theories are not nuts, or the theorists are not nuts.
It was a totally reasonable thing to consider.
Chavez, he's not saying it happened, but he says it's entirely believable and plausible that this administration, which has been likened to Hitler by liberal Democrats, would indeed blow up the World Trade Center.
Now, what are we supposed to say to this, Dingy Harry or Tim Russert or Bob Schieffer?
You think it's getting dirty?
You think it's getting low or is going to get low?
You think what Boehner said rocked Washington?
How about what the Democrats have been saying for four years rocking the country?
You wonder why there's no unity and you want to blame it on Bush.
You wonder why there's no unity?
Listen to your own buddies in the Democratic Party and what they have been saying.
And their editorialists and their willing accomplices at the drive-by media.
The New York Times, the Washington Post, the Boston Globe, the list, and examples are endless.
Back to the audio soundbites, back to CNN's American Morning co-host Miles O'Brien, interviewing CNN's Michael Ware, liberal journalist, is in Baghdad.
O'Brien says, you're on the ground in Al-Anbar province.
What are they saying there on the ground?
The last three or four months, new U.S. tactics has forced Al-Qaeda to shift its tactics.
But as the brigade commander who owns Ramadi says, we are in contact with the enemy every day.
And that enemy is Al-Qaeda.
There's a direct link between the men we fight, street to street, face to face, day to day, and the people who brought down the World Trade Center.
Whoa, Does this guy still work at CNN?
This guy just established here a link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda.
I know what the Democrats will say.
Well, they weren't in Iraq before Bush went to war there.
Al-Qaeda didn't care.
You know, doesn't it strain believability, ladies and gentlemen, to believe that?
I mean, Al-Qaeda was everywhere before March of 2003.
They were in the Philippines.
They were in Singapore.
They were in Chechnya.
They were in Bosnia.
Militant Islamists, Islamo-fascists were everywhere.
They were in Kuwait.
They're in Egypt.
They're in Lebanon.
They're mixed in with the Palestinian.
They were in Iran.
They never went to Iraq.
The one country on the planet that Al-Qaeda never went, we are led to believe by Democrats is Iraq.
Now, listen to this, folks, and you tell us if we're losing it, Dingy Harry.
This is Feingold Monday Night on Capitol Hill.
The use of certain terms, like Islamic fashion, I think, moves us in the wrong direction.
I could care less with obviously what the terrorists think about what they're called.
You can call them anything you want, worst names possible.
But to use the name of Islam in connection with fascism is an insult to Muslims all over America and around the world, and I think that hurts us.
Our goal is to isolate terrorists, not to isolate Muslims.
That's what Islamofascists do.
They are Islamists, Senator Feingold, and they're out there talking about how the Koran gives them their daily marching orders.
What are we supposed to call them?
Why do you really care, Senator Feingold?
Why do you really care that they're called Islamo-fascists or Islamic fascists?
I don't think it's Islamo they disagree with.
I don't think they like the term fascist.
That's a term reserved for them to call people like us, Nazis, fascists, and this sort of stuff.
And now, people with whom we are at war, they're just afraid that that's going to resonate with the American people.
We could call them Islamo-Nazis.
That'd probably bug people, Islamo-fascists.
If you don't believe they're fascists, Senator Feingold, go take a look at what they did to Afghanistan when they ran it.
Take a look at what Al-Qaeda and the Taliban did to Afghanistan when they ran it.
You think that wasn't a fascist.
It was worse than that.
But that's not even the point.
Why are they so afraid of that term?
Why is Feingold making a big deal out of it?
The Democrats all join in saying the term is not useful.
It is damn useful because it identifies them.
It just focuses attention again on the fact that they have no interest in actually defeating that enemy.
They are more interested in defeating George W. Bush.
West, Mr. Snirdley.
Well, I wonder if we did call them Christian fundamentalists, if Senator Feingold would be upset about that.
Probably not.
Speaking of that, yesterday on ABC's The View during the hot topics discussion about the president's 9-11 speech, Elizabeth Hasselbeck said to Rosie O'Donnell, we're on the offense because we were attacked five years ago, Rosie.
We were attacked not by a nation.
And as a result of the attack and the killing of nearly 3,000 innocent people, we invaded two countries and killed innocent people again.
Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America, where we have a separation of church and state.
A glittering jewel of colossal ignorance who believes that she's the smartest woman in the world next to Hillary because she has a fawning New York entertainment media propping her up.
And there are various reasons why that happens.
None of them have anything to do with her brain or her intelligence or her IQ or her knowledge.
Rosie O'Donnell on ABC's The View, radical Christianity just as threatening as radical Islam.
And yet Dingy Harry and Tim Russert and Bob Schieffer somehow miss this.
And it's important that they catch this because this is what the American people watch.
Now, I want you all to relax because I'm telling you, this, I know you heard some applause, but remember where they are.
They're in New York when this show goes on.
They've got an upper west side of Manhattan audience in that show, the studios on the upper west side of Manhattan.
And there's a lot of fear of Christianity in a whole bunch of different parts of this country.
Yet the Democrats are out there all upset about the fact.
What was the first time that we played?
Somebody upset about Dingy Harry.
Haven't we moved beyond the Republicans are more religious than Democrats?
And then go right to Rosie O'Donnell show where Christians are criticized and the audience erupts in applause.
I don't think these people have the slightest touch.
People tell me I'm out of touch with the country.
Oh, I beg to disagree.
I don't think the people inside the beltway have the slightest clue what's going on in this country.
A lot of them, both parties.
So here you have it, ladies and gentlemen.
That's the issue that has Washington roiling.
What they don't get is it's had the country roiling for years.
The fact that they're just now picking up on it, stunning.
Here's Dick in Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Rush, my tree, and second generation dittos to you, my family, my son, who's on his way to hopefully fight our pilot to the Air Force.
We've grown and listened with you for a long time.
Thank you.
I think there's a significant part about this whole Democratic position on restriction of internal security and everything.
The president, like the oath I took as a Marine going to Vietnam, has sworn to protect our enemies, both foreign and domestic.
And enemies is a pretty subjective term.
Many of these people are lucky he hasn't declared them as enemies, including the head of the New York Times, and taken much more severe action.
For my part, I wish he'd swallow hard and really get in gear as a warrior and take some of these people into custody if they truly are obstacles to our success.
And lastly, I find it very interesting that Democrats would compare Bush to Hitler.
Hitler walked into a ballroom on his rise to fame and many people stood and applauded.
I would suspect that many of today's liberal Democrats would have been in that ballroom and later would have been dragged into death camps to help clean up.
They were on the wrong side of the argument.
I think George Bush is a bigger statesman than anybody I've seen recently since John Kennedy.
And there we have it.
Dick from Kalamazoo on the record on the EIB network.
Thank you, Dick.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
I want to go back to one of the sound bites that we just aired.
I want to go back to John Lewis, Democrat from Georgia, on the House floor this morning during one-minute speeches.
Mr. Speaker, the statement by Majority Leader Boehner was shameful and disgraceful.
To suggest my fellow Democrats care more about protecting the terrorists than the American people is not right.
It is not fair.
It is not just.
It is not the American way.
Democrats will not stand by and let a single attack go unanswered.
You may play the politics of fear, but this dog will not hunt.
This dog just will not hunt.
The line in there that I find interesting is when Congressman Lewis says, Democrats will not stand by and let a single attack go unanswered.
That is precisely what you did all during the 90s.
When the Islamo fascists attack, they didn't do anything.
When John Boehner utters some words you don't like, you march to the well of the house and you go bunkers.
And you send Dingy Harry and Nancy Pelosi out there to do the same.
George Bush is your real enemy, Congressman Lewis.
At least that's what you seem to indicate.
That's how you make it appear.
We don't hear any condemnation of al-Qaeda from you people.
We don't hear any condemnation of the Islamofascists from your people.
We really don't.
What we hear about is your concern for the way they're being treated when they're prisoners.
We don't hear any condemnation when they behead people, when they blow up and murder innocent people.
We don't hear any condemnation of that.
We really don't.
We don't hear you criticize it.
We don't even hear you agitated or angry about it.
Boy, look, John Boehner says something, and the world comes to a screeching halt while you guys make sure that every attack goes answered.
All right, now, if you'll forgive me, ladies and gentlemen, I must delve here a little bit into something that has to do with me.
Last night, the big story with John Gibson, Lanny Davis.
Gibson says, Do you think this is an example of what you're talking about in your book?
They're talking about the path to 9-11.
And, of course, liberals cannot defend Clinton's failures on terrorism, so they do what they always do, and they send an attack dog out there to try to discredit the critics of Bill Clinton.
And that's why Lenny Davis was on.
He's got a book out.
What's his name?
His book is what's the name of his stupid book?
I can't even remember the name of the book.
At any rate, this is what Lanny Davis said in response to John Gibson's question.
The very same people like Rush Limbaugh, who were very, very happy to see this particular false depiction of President Clinton go on the air, were at the forefront of trying to get the Ronald Reagan and successfully did get CBS to pull Ronald Reagan.
Rush Limbaugh engages in hypocrisy.
Right.
Now, stick with me on this.
Later on the same network, the Fox News channel, the O'Reilly factor, he's talking to Lanny Davis.
And O'Reilly says, I believe the media is driving the gotcha game.
It's the media and some of the folks unfortunately follow along.
The ABC movie was just as unfair and fictionalized in many respects as was the CBS depiction of Ronald Reagan.
Where was Rush Limbaugh about Ronald Reagan?
He wanted that pulled.
All right, now, I didn't see either of these programs.
I got emails from people last night describing for me the comments made by Lanny Davis.
And my initial reaction was, I didn't remember talking about the Reagan movie at the time.
And I certainly don't remember suggesting that the movie not air.
So I got a hold of Coco, the webmaster at rushlimbaugh.com, and I said, I need you to do an archival search on everything I said about this movie.
And there's a reason, ladies and gentlemen, why I don't remember saying anything about it.
I was off the air for five weeks during the controversy.
I was out in Arizona undergoing rehabilitation for my addiction to prescription painkillers.
I had nothing to say.
But when I got out, the controversy was over.
The controversy was, and I weighed in on it at that point.
But even looking at the transcripts of everything I said about it, I never once suggested that the miniseries or the movie on Reagan be pulled.
And I've got, and we're going to put the transcripts up at rushlimbaugh.com on, let's see, the first thing I said, June, let's see, November 17th of 2003.
Look at the Reagan movie.
The Reagan movie got canceled off CBS.
They moved it to Showtime.
I mean, would that have happened 10 years ago?
Would that have happened 15 years ago?
Hell's Bell's no way, folks.
Not only would the Reagan, it would have been in the theaters first and then on CBS.
And it would have been produced 10 years ago.
They snuck around.
They tried to wait and sneak it in on us, but no, be confident out there, folks.
These people have had their day.
November 21st, 2003.
The Reagan story, look what they're going to do with that.
Show you how America's has changed.
It got canceled.
Media says a bunch of right-wing wackos did it.
Nope, the American people know the truth about Reagan and didn't want to see that fine man besmirched by Barbara Streisand and her husband in connection with CBS, particularly when he was not able to defend himself about it or react to it.
November 25th, 2003.
That's why that stupid movie on the Reagan's was a bunch of hogwash, because the essence of Reagan wasn't even in that movie, because the people who hate Reagan don't.
I mean, they had the essence, and they're nowhere near oriented toward promoting that.
And then in June of 2004, I go on to describe it some more and then talking about what they're really angry about, folks, is that Reagan didn't turn his presidency over to AIDS.
This was during the funeral and aftermath of so forth.
So at no time did I ever engage the public or encourage anybody to pull a movie.
And it hardly happened when I returned back to the golden EIB microphone after five years.
That's not a big deal.
And unlike John Lewis, I'm not going to sit here and go batty about it.
But I was a little curious last night because I didn't remember participating in this.
And there's their reason why.
You know, maybe we will do a movie, Lanny, how a stained blue dress destroyed a presidency.
You know, we could do that.
After that, we can go out and do the kidnapping and beheading of Bill Clinton and send it to some film festival, see what reaction we get to it is.
But at any rate, Lanny Davis may not have even, he may probably just assumed, since I am the conservative movement, since I am the leader of conservative thought, they just assumed Limbaugh had to be behind it.
Because Limbaugh, they think, is the power that made ABC run this miniseries.
I just wanted to correct the record because I didn't say anything about it, primarily because I didn't have the chance to say anything about it.
Lanny, I'll hear what you just say was a dramatized quote, and you don't have to be held a total accuracy.
Just say that, and I'll forgive you.
Okay, first hour is in the can on the way over to the warehouse where all artifacts are kept for the future Limbaugh Broadcast Museum.