All Episodes
Previous Next
Sept. 15, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
33:59
September 15, 2006, Friday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And greetings to you, music lovers, thrill seekers, conversationalists, all across Fruited Plain, America's real anchorman, the doctor of democracy, America's truth detector, a man who really cares.
Rush Limbaugh from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Great to have you with us.
It's Friday.
Let's roll.
Live from the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's Open Line Friday.
Yes, yes, yes, yes.
Yip, yep, yip, yip, yahoo.
We'll go to the phones here pretty soon.
And you know the rules.
We go to phones.
The show is all yours.
Talk about whatever you want.
HR, we still have Secretary Rice next hour.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice will be joining us one hour from now.
The first segment of the next hour, which we seldom do on Open Line Friday, but when they call, we decide.
All right, here's the number 800-2822.
I'm not going to ask her about her boyfriend, and don't you dare try to don't even go there, snurdly cheese.
800-282-2882.
I don't even know she's got a boyfriend.
I'm not even interested in it.
800-282-2882.
Email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
A couple of more, three more soundbites from President Bush.
Here's one of the big finish here.
Mike Allen from Time Magazine said, Mr. President, it was reported earlier this week in a meeting with conservative journalists, you said that you'd seen changes in the culture you referred to as a third awakening.
I wonder if you could tell us about what you meant by that, what led you to that conclusion, and do you see any contradictory evidence in the culture?
I was asking their opinion about whether or not there was a, you know, a third awakening, I called it.
I just read a book on Abraham Lincoln, and his presidency was right around the time of what they call the second awakening.
And I was curious to know whether or not these smart people felt like there was any historical parallels.
I also said that I had run for office in the first time to change a culture.
It seems like to me that something is happening in the religious life of America, but I'm not a very good focus group either.
I'm encapsulated here.
I'm able to see a lot of people.
And from my perspective, people are coming to say, I'm praying for you.
And it's an uplifting part of being the president.
It inspires me.
And I'm grateful that a fellow citizen would say a prayer for me and Laura.
He's right about this Third Awakening business, if by that he means that something's happening in the religious life of America.
And one of the greatest indicators is all the anti-Christian bigotry that's out there and has been for a while.
Mel Gibson's movies signified it, really pointed at it.
But there's a lot of fear.
The ACLU and the mad left, they don't like any references to God.
They don't like references to religion.
And yet they're out there trying to find a way to reach Christians.
I'll tell you, if you need any more evidence that there's something going on in terms of this, just look at all the different stories.
We get one a week about how the Democrats are trying to reach out to these people.
Why, if they're not that important or that numerous.
A couple of sound bites here with the president bantering back and forth, having fun with the president, or having fun with the drive-by media, rather.
This in the Rose Garden again, and the president calls on the Hutch.
From both the eavesdropping program and the detainee issues.
We call it the Terrorist Surveillance Program, Hutch.
That's the one.
We call it the Terrence terrorist surveillance.
Little things like this happened throughout the press conference.
Next up was Cheryl Gay Stolberg from the New York Times.
And the president says, New York Times reporter Cheryl.
Hi, Mr. President.
Hi, how are you doing?
I'm well today.
Thank you.
Did you start off with hi, Mr. President?
Hello, Mr. President.
Okay, that's fine either way.
That was a friendly greeting.
Thank you.
We're a friendly newspaper.
Yeah.
Let me just say, I'd hate to see unfriendly.
They hate laughing along with him, but they did.
You know, folks, did our fourth hour yesterday.
And something came up in the fourth hour.
I forget exactly how it was.
Somebody, oh, somebody, correct me if I missed this, but somebody calls it, you know, you don't talk as much about your personal life anymore.
And I said, well, you know, that's because every time I do, I get beat up by people say, stick to the issues.
We don't care about golf.
We don't want to hear you brag about who you're hopping up and with and so forth.
And I just, plus, it's been really intense here lately with all the news that's out there, and I have felt a duty just to get straight to it.
It's important, especially heading up to the November elections.
And yeah, gave you the IHOP story.
But that was, see, I waited till the third hour to do that.
I used to open the program with that stuff.
We were talking about this with people on the fourth hour yesterday.
Well, you need to do more of it.
We liked it.
And I got flooded with emails from people who said, tell these people that say, stick to the issues to screw it.
So I'm going to tell you a little personal story.
I just walked out of the studio here at the top of the hour break.
You know, I got a new car yesterday.
Well, if you're listening to fourth hour, you know I got a new car.
I got 612 horsepower HR.
It's a Mercedes SL65 AMG, black with black interior, convertible hardtop.
Delivered yesterday afternoon right after the fourth hour.
Showed up at four o'clock when the fourth hour was over.
Well, whatever car I have here, the staff comes and washes it every day.
Sometimes they wax it.
So I walk out there during the break, just standing up, stretching out.
Brian says, well, you're going to get that car washed.
Is Joe going to come and wax the car today?
Very snarkily, he said this.
And I said, I don't know if he's going to wax it.
He'd probably come and wash it every day.
You wash the car every day.
I don't.
The staff does, but yes, we do it.
It's because we live on the ocean.
Do you know what salt air will do to a car if you don't keep it clean and all that?
But every day, I'm sitting there.
I'm getting grief for taking care of my cars.
I said, Brian, I'll tell you what I'm saying.
Do you know why people live on the ocean?
And I live right on the ocean.
You don't have air conditioner outside compressors because the salt air will destroy them in five years.
And for my place, it would take a farm of 44 of them.
Well, I'm sorry, that would be a stupid expense.
So I've got a different kind of air conditioning, a water-cooled mechanical tower and so forth that air conditions the places on the property.
He said, Well, put the cars in the garage.
And then it gets through.
You know, garages are not vacuums.
Ocean air, salt air can get in there.
But this is this is not.
I said, I'll tell you what I'm going to do, Brian.
I'll take this new car and I'm going to leave it out.
I'll wash it maybe once a month, if you would approve.
Leave it out.
And in a year when it's ruined, I'll give it to you.
And it reminded me, I had a friend fly down earlier on my airplane to see me.
Got off the airplane.
Why do you have a flight attendant?
My point is, folks, you think that I rule my world.
You think that I rule my.
Think that life is different from no, I'm like every other guy.
Nothing I do is right.
It always has to be explained.
It always has to be justified.
And I haven't the slightest idea what I'm ever doing.
Open line Friday.
El Rushboast serving humanity simply by showing up and having more fun than a human being should be allowed to have.
I just got an email note from a friend said, hey, does your new car have a flight attendant?
That's not a bad idea.
All right, here is Ed in Holmedale, New Jersey as we go to the phones.
Welcome, sir.
Nice to have you.
And ditto to you, Rush.
And I enjoy knowing the whole side of your personality, just not the seriousness.
Thank you, sir.
The question that I have is really addressed to McCain.
And the question is: given the restraints that he's trying to impose upon the U.S. military, how would his being a prisoner would have changed if the restraints that he's now requesting were imposed before he became a prisoner?
Or for that matter, anyone that's been a prisoner and held by our enemies over the ensuing pattern since the Vietnam War.
How would their experience have changed?
Yeah, you know, that is an excellent question.
And of course, the North Vietnamese didn't abide by the Geneva Conventions anyway.
That's exactly right.
They were 20 years old by then.
The Geneva Conventions were 20 years old by then.
This is why this is so frustrating because the attempt to establish a moral equivalence between our enemies and us.
You know, I've had it with the American left thinking we're no better than anybody else.
But it really offends me when people in our own party start joining that parade, like Senator Graham and like Senator McCain and like Senator Warner.
There are three questions that I think they need to be asked.
Three questions that McCain and Warner and Graham need to be asked.
Number one, do you want military commissions that'll bring terror suspects to justice?
Number two, the CIE detainee questioning program saved lives, it foiled a number of plots, and provided a treasure trove of intelligence we would have not gotten elsewhere.
Do you want this to go forward?
These are the kinds of questions they need to be asked.
Third question, can you specify what behavior is prohibited by the Geneva Convention language forbidding cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment?
If you can't, don't you think it'd be a good idea to spell out what we can and can't do?
There's something fishy about this.
None of this makes any sense.
If viewed through a conventional prism, you want to hear something else that doesn't make sense.
I shared with you earlier today Richard Miniter's piece in the New York Post describing this.
You've got to read it.
We'll link to it at rushlimbaugh.com, but it's right there in the opinion section of the New York Post website.
Some 1,000 lawyers represent 440 prisoners, all on a pro bono basis.
And they're using letters ostensibly sent from their lawyers, attorney client privilege, the detainees are, the prisoners are, in order to send messages to each other about plotting future attacks on guards and so forth at Club Gitmo.
So I got a note from Andy McCarthy, who has participated in trials of terrorists, AMZ Youssef, and so forth earlier.
He's now with the Center for the Preservation of Democracy.
Metal block on the title.
He also writes at National Review Online.
Used to be in the U.S. Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York in Manhattan.
He said, Rush, as regards a lawyers at Club Gitmo, I put this in the Federalist Society paper I did in defense of the NSA program.
Prominent among the attorneys representing the jihadist at Gitmo is the Center for Constitutional Rights, which I believe was started by William Kunstler and Arthur Kenoy in the 1970s.
William Kunstler, Chicago 8 wacko, left-wing civil rights attorney.
Its current leader, Michael Ratner, has filed lawsuits on behalf of numerous enemy combatants held.
As Senator Graham acknowledged in Senate proceedings in December, Ratner gave an interview to Mother Jones magazine and bragged about how he has made it harder for the military to do its job.
He particularly emphasized that the litigation interferes with interrogation of enemy combatants.
This litigation is brutal for the United States, said Ratner.
We have over 100 lawyers now from big and small firms working to represent these detainees.
Every time an attorney goes down there, it makes it that much harder for the U.S. military to do what they're doing.
You can't run an interrogation with attorneys.
What are they going to do now that we're getting court orders to get more lawyers down there?
That's the group of lawyers with the mindset representing the enemy at Club Guitmo.
And now, in the same context, you've got McCain and Graham and Warner coming out standing in the way of a program that's working going forward.
And as I say through the conventional prism, it doesn't make sense.
If you look at it, the prism of McCain's electoral chances in 08 and the possibility that he may want Republicans to lose big in 06 because that'll help him overcome his problems with the Republican base in 08, then it starts to make a little sense.
And you can look at Graham as a lapdog of McCain, a Warner, who knows.
But it's frustrating.
It's maddening.
But the president is dealing with it.
He came out and hammered these people, taking the message to the American people.
McCain thinks he's bigger than the president, and he's going to find out otherwise.
Frank and Dallas, I'm glad you waited, sir.
Welcome to Open Line Friday.
Rush, honor to speak to you, sir.
Thank you.
Idea.
I think great idea.
I think it undercuts McCain, Graham, and Warner.
And lawyers do it all the time: put a clause in the act specifically excluding uniform combatants from signatory nations.
Well, it could be.
I'm not involved in the intricacies of how they're trying to negotiate this.
I don't think the thing that concerns me here, I don't think the specifics of this are what pose the problem.
I think this is being seized upon purely as a political opportunity for President for Senator McCain.
But as to your point about saying that uniformed military personnel are exempt, you can't do that because the Geneva Conventions cover them specifically.
You can't amend the convention to say it doesn't cover them.
And we're not amending it.
We're interpreting it.
But if you do that, then you're causing all kinds of problems.
That illustrates the fact that these people, the al-Qaeda terrorists and other terrorists, don't even have protection under the Geneva Conventions until the Supreme Court said so.
They took care of this already.
That was the basis of the Hamden case.
We have to give non-uniform combatants Geneva Convention rights.
So they've swatted that one away.
Even if it would have been a good idea, can't do it now.
Denise, Kansas City, Missouri, glad you waited.
Welcome to the program.
Hi.
Hi.
I'm a little nervous.
You don't sound nervous.
You sound excited and thrilled.
Well, I am that too.
Good.
I just had a thought while I'll just talk about torture is going on and how Bush is pinned for all of it when there is none, actually.
But I wonder if anyone's thought about the Branch Davidian incident and how there was torture, if they want to call music blaring.
For 24-7, they played that loud music on innocent women and children.
They couldn't sleep, whatever.
So does that mean Clinton was in favor of torture?
No, no, because Clinton didn't know what was going on.
That was all Janet Reno's thing.
Oh, okay.
Yeah, but the buck never got to the White House.
You know, the buck.
The buck never got here.
Depends on who you're torturing, I guess.
Well, we tortured grapefruit faced Manuel Norieger that way.
We tried to blast him out of his hideout in Panama City with loud rock music.
I forget the name of the group, but it would have worked on me.
But we did.
This is all.
Look, I don't know if you were with me the first part of the program.
So much of this is all academic.
The way these people are being treated at Club Getmo, it doesn't even get close to torture.
It's laughably gentle.
There's a myth that has sprung up that we're torturing people.
All of these editorials today, Bush seeks legal torture.
It absolutely offends my sensibilities.
This is a media myth.
Drive-by media has got everybody now thinks that we're debating what kind and just how much torture can be used.
Read the Richard Meneter piece of the New York Post today.
It's right there on their website in their opinion section.
It'll blow your mind if you didn't hear me go through this in the first part of the program, the first hour today.
I also want to say Jane Fonda does not speak for me, and I hate it when liberal women go out there and act like they're speaking for every woman in America.
We all have our own opinions, and I just want to get that out there.
Thank you.
You're absolutely right.
The feminists have always sought to be perceived as speaking for all women, and it always has been insulting to me.
I appreciate your comments because I know, I know how you really meant them.
You mean I'm funny, trustworthy, likable, lovable, and all that, and that she was wrong when she said that I wasn't.
Back in a sec.
Hi, welcome back, folks.
Nice to have you with us.
Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice.
At the top of the next hour, we will have her for the entire segment at the top of the next hour.
Let me change gears here just a little bit.
There is a Washington Post story with just a delicious headline, Democrats meander in a new direction.
And somebody at the Drive-By Media came up with that headline and that word, Democrats meander in new direction.
Meander means you're wandering around out there.
You know, I've told you people, I play on some golf courses where they got gators, crocodiles, whatever they are.
And they always say, look, if one of these things comes out of water at you, just run as fast as you can, but zigzag.
Just zigzag because they can't do that.
They can catch you if you run straight line.
They'll run out.
They'll run out of energy in about 20 seconds, but you got to zigzag.
So maybe the Democrats think they're being chased by Gators.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, the woman who becomes Speaker, if the Democrats get lucky in November, began her weekly news conference yesterday holding up a red, white, and blue brochure.
She said, I hope you all received a new direction for America, standing at a lectern that bore the same slogan.
She called the manifesto a compilation of many of the initiatives taken by our House Democratic caucus that encompasses our new direction for all Americans.
It was a handsome booklet full of little photographs, popular proposals that there was a problem.
Democrats have had more new directions recently than MapQuest.
MapQuest could not produce a map to help you follow these people and find them.
Among the party's campaign slogans this year, culture of corruption, that went on the Weinstein, culture of cronyism, that died, do nothing Congress, rubber stamp Congress, together we can do better, together America can do better, and most recently, six for 06.
For those keeping score at home, Democrats arrived at new direction yesterday by downgrading one of the six for 06 issues, health care, and upgrading three others, honesty, civility, and fiscal discipline for a total of eight items on the content page.
These are the people that are so in touch.
These are the people that so know what we're going to do, what they're going to do, and how they're going to take over.
They haven't the slightest clue.
They are wandering.
They're throwing stuff up against the wall, hoping some of it will stick.
They've de-emphasized health care.
They took health care out of the plan.
What in the world?
Folks, they don't do anything without internal polling.
Speaking of that, I have to share this with you.
I've had it reported to me some of the details of internal Republican polling.
People that are closely involved in Republican politics, and I'll admit this to you, they're excited because they say they're seeing a surge.
There has been a tremendous surge for Republicans in the last few days, and it's more than just intuition.
I'm talking about what internal polls are saying, Republican polls, not the newspaper polls that you hear each and every day.
And it is something that is manifesting itself throughout the polling, and not just one poll, a number of polls.
Now, to give you an idea, some candidates, and they're talking about House candidates here, who a month ago were down in the polls are now up by as much as 20-plus points.
I didn't get any names.
I just got the polling data and the numbers.
A few districts have been so good, it's almost unbelievable.
In fact, I told you yesterday the RNC had said that 14 previously thought of districts as competitive are now no longer competitive.
The Republicans feel they've locked them down.
So a few districts have been so good, it's almost unbelievable.
I was told that there's no question in the minds of people studying these polls that if the election were today, that the Republicans would hold both the House and the Senate.
Now, they're out there trying to account for the surge, obviously, because they want to get it right.
Probably what you would expect, the president and vice president, Secretary of Defense, have been relentlessly focusing on national security.
The president has delivered speeches in the last two weeks, the 9-11 anniversary, the press conference today, the remainder of the stakes in this struggle, what we face as a nation.
The people are being reminded of it numerous times a week.
Then you had the foiled London plot, the visibility of the president, all these interviews and press conferences and speeches that he's doing.
And then, of course, you have to throw in falling gas prices.
Gas prices in Iowa now in two different places are under $2 a gallon.
$1.96, $1.98.
There are other stories about the gas price that even better in terms of the oil supply.
And there's, in fact, somebody, they just finished studying the first half of the year demand for oil, and it was less than what was expected.
Remember, the paranoia about demand for oil was in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and all the destruction of the oil derricks and rigs out there in the Gulf.
The oil price is coming down.
The average price is about $2.50 a gallon.
That is being noticed.
And by the way, that has led to a surge, according to the conference board, a surge of consumer confidence that hasn't been seen in a lot of months.
So there's no question that the falling oil price is also a factor in the surge taking place for Republicans in House districts.
It also helps that the Democrats, who are so scared to death that they'll be seen for what they are, which is soft on defense and national security issues, are actually engaging the debate, which to me ensures that it'll be conducted on our terms.
They're the ones who are reacting.
They're the ones who are acting like stuck pigs.
The Democrats are the ones saying, you can't say that about us.
This attack will not go unanswered, John Lewis said.
So the Republicans, the president defining the issue, defining and setting the terms and tone of the debate when it comes to national security, all of these things, Democrats appearing on the defensive, the falling gas price, the foil plot in London, president's visibility, and all that.
Now, here's the question.
There's no question that the internal Republican polling shows a surge.
But will it last?
Nobody knows.
The only way that you can really make it last is to just keep it up.
The president has to stay out there.
The vice president has to continue to go out there.
The White House has to do this.
It's just, you know, it's not them personally.
It's just the nature of the game.
And, you know, some of this boost may be temporary, too.
I don't want anybody getting overconfident here, but I am trying to tell you, I'm not trying.
I am.
I am telling you that there is reason for optimism here and their internal Republican polling.
And by the way, these are not polls that they conduct to fool themselves.
They don't conduct these polls to lie to themselves.
They don't want false good news, phony good news.
They're not trying to put out polls like the drive-by media does to affect public opinion because the public never sees these polls.
And I haven't seen them.
I'm just being told the interpretation of them.
But you have to figure some of this boost is temporary because the 9-11 memories, vivid.
Democrats played that wrong on Monday and Tuesday as well.
But I think some of this is going to last.
And Vin Weber had a piece in the Wall Street Journal earlier.
He said, beyond a certain point, the results of the 1994 election were set in concrete.
There was nothing Clinton or the Democrats could do to change the outcome because they couldn't change the election narrative.
What makes this election different is that we have an issue out there, the war against Islamic fascism, that can completely alter the landscape.
Now, midterm elections for second-term presidents are historically very difficult.
Reagan suffered losses in both of his midterm elections in 82 and 86.
It's rough out there.
There's no question.
But what's happening, I think what people are going to rely on is the fact that there is at this point in time in the election season, with the election less than two months away, when momentum starts shifting as it has, the conventional wisdom is that it doesn't go back.
We're seeing several races, numbers going from minus three to plus seven, from plus two to plus twelve, from plus five to plus 17.
And these are significant increases in this internal polling.
But the person that informed me of this said that What we've seen so far in recent polling based on this year is that it takes a while to reverse course.
It takes significant events and issues to reverse course.
But when you do, when you finally turn the corner and reverse course, it tends to be pretty durable.
It's not like you have bursts of positive news and then a reversal from that back to negative news this close to the election.
It happens to be more enduring.
And I think one of the reasons for that is that more and more people are paying attention now.
People that normally don't pay attention during the course of the year.
Life is pretty good.
You don't have to pay attention to these things that are upsetting to you.
You get close to the election, more and more people start paying attention.
They show up in the internal polling.
So Republicans, you know, president's approval number all year long was plummeting.
It was heading south.
There were gas price increases, the February bombing of that mosque in Samara, the port deal, the Dubai ports deal, all that.
And the negative impact lasted for quite a while.
Now there is a change, a switch, a surge, and the momentum is clearly on the Republican side, especially when you look at this Democrats meander in a new direction.
They're wandering aimlessly out there in the woods, folks, and they have no clue where they're going and what to do because who they are and what they really are is not guiding them.
They're pure reactionaries, and they're on the defense.
So it is expected that while there may be some little declines from this surge of good news, that the momentum shift has taken place.
And that this close to the election, you're not going to have massive shifts and reversals.
Look, it points out, even if you wanted to say that the reason for polls being negative in the first part of the year was a little trumped up and exaggerated.
And if you have all the dry-by-media polls painting this picture of the apocalypse every day, as far as Bush and the Republicans are concerned, it will have some impact in affecting people's minds, as we unfortunately are aware.
But the news from inside is that this surge is a serious surge, not likely to be reversed and surging again, reversed and surging again.
Once the momentum switches this time around, at this time of the election season, it generally holds.
And there's a compatible story here from Rasmussen, Virginia Senate.
Allen's lead erosion halts.
Incumbent Republican Senator George Allen's rating slide appears to have halted, but it's too early to tell whether his campaign has reversed its course.
Latest Rasmussen reports, election survey shows Allen leading Democrat James Webb, 50 to 43.
So he's staunched the bleeding now.
Allen's up by seven points.
He has stopped the bleeding.
This coincides with some of the internal data that I was given about the Republican situation in the House.
So if Allen has stanched the bleeding now and his lead is at 50, the next thing that'll happen is that he should surge.
He is the incumbent.
Webb's not all that strong a candidate.
On the other side of this, the Washington Post will redouble its efforts to destroy Allen.
We'll see all of that happen this weekend, next week.
Keep a sharp eye.
Back after this, don't go away.
I need to offer a correction.
I said the conference board reported consumer confidence up.
It's not.
It's the RBC Cash Index.
The RBC Cash Index, based on the results of the international polling firm Ipsos, who works with AP, showed confidence rebounding to 93.7 in early September.
That's a seven-month high, as lower gasoline prices made people feel a lot better about the current economic climate and their own financial standing.
And the Muslims are outraged at Pope Benedict XVI.
Muslim fury grows over Pope's speech.
They're rioting out there.
They're burning things.
They're going through conniption fits.
They're summoning the Vatican ambassador in Pakistan.
They're all upset in Turkey, ladies and gentlemen.
What about all those hateful actions and comments from their community, which go largely unanswered?
We're looking at a two-way street.
The Pope's not involved in a jihad against Jews or anybody else.
The Pope is not involved in international terrorism.
The Pope is not fomenting all of this hatred and anger.
What's this?
Christians don't riot in this country when the liberals hit them with all kinds of criticism and jokes.
The Israelis don't riot and burn down their own buildings and so forth in Israel when they are criticized and maligned and threatened.
You have a certain percentage of those who do.
This is undeniable.
Kill and maim in the name of Islam.
Maybe their perverted version of it, what have you.
They actually run some countries too, i.e. Mahmoud Ahmadinezad.
And we're supposed to get upset about the Pope.
We're supposed to get upset about a speech the Pope made.
Pope uttered words.
The Pope doesn't have a jihad against anybody.
Pope's not promoting terrorism.
The Pope's not recruiting people and giving them false promises of an afterlife if they'll go out and kill themselves as long as they kill somebody else.
The Pope's not out there trying to build nukes.
The Pope doesn't have any divisions.
Pope's got the Swiss guards.
Pope doesn't have an army.
Pope's not invading anybody.
And, you know, 72 Virgins angle of the Pope.
Yeah, that's sort of a disconnect there.
But I mean, Pope was quoting a Byzantine emperor who apparently Malan and the Prophet Muhammad and the militant Muslims are burning flags and other things and rioting and so forth.
They're all upset because the Pope didn't have the guts to say it himself, that he was quoting somebody that's been dead for thousands of years.
At any rate, you know, show me your university, show me your hospitals, militant Islamists.
Show me these great cultural and institutional things that you've built.
Show me something besides riots, death, and murder.
Got a break here for the top of the hour.
We'll open the next hour with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.
She'll be with us for the first segment.
▲
Export Selection