All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 2, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:38
October 2, 2006, Monday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Well, I'm told everybody's waiting to hear my take and what I have to say about events that transpired since this program ended Friday afternoon.
And you shall not be disappointed, whoever you are.
Greetings, my friends.
You're tuned to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Here we are, the Excellence in Broadcasting Network, the nation's leading and most listened to radio talk show over 600 great radio stations out there, making it possible for America to be saved.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
And the email address is rush at EIBNet.com.
I think the first thing we need to do out there, folks, well, not we, but the Republican Party needs to just simply say that Jim McGreevy is now the official face of the Republican Party and end all this criticism.
That way, when McGreevy goes on Oprah, as Mark Foley probably will not, uh, then uh, you know, it it it a little sort of balance the scales out there.
Uh and I also I'm looking at a new merchandising opportunity here, folks.
You remember back in the early days of this program when the the uh uh the left was telling us that we needed uh safe sex out there, and the safe sex equal a condom.
And of course, well, I thought let's illustrate how effective that'll be.
And I wasn't out and did speeches and I put a condom over a microphone calling it safe talk, trying to illustrate that the condom would protect the audience from anything offensive or rank that I might say.
I don't think it's too early here to start thinking about uh EIB email condoms and instant message condoms, at least prevent your keyboard from being stained other than your dress.
Um the only way for safe emails to be sent, the EIB keyboard condom.
Let's look at how the Democrats are playing this first off.
It's sort of a pattern.
You know, if you go back and you look at uh 2002 and 2004, uh, in terms of these midterm elections, and 2004 was uh again a year that they thought they were gonna win big with Carrie and take back the House and everything.
They started off uh uh in this campaign season with the culture of corruption.
Hey, we're gonna make real hay out of Jack Abramoff and uh Tom Delay, a number of other things, and something came along that preempted that.
William Jefferson, Congressman Democrat Louisiana, and Harry Reid and a couple of other Democrats came along, gave them a problem uh advancing the whole notion of the culture corruption, so they dragged Jack Mertha out, and they started going after the war on Iraq, war in terror, and so forth and so on.
Uh and uh they've they've been they've been lured now back to uh uh the culture of corruption with the Mark Foley story.
They are all over the board.
And let me just tell you one thing.
I'm gonna get into this in greater detail as the program unfolds today.
But they do not find the people in the drive-by media that you've been watching and listening to all weekend and the Democrats, they do not find what Mark Foley did to be repugnant at all.
They have defended such behavior in the past, and they have gone out of their way to see to it that uh those who have engaged in such behavior might have been reprimanded and so forth in a perfunctory way.
But aside from McGreevy, they all hang on.
Barney Frank, Gary Studs, uh a number of these people.
They don't find what he did repugnant, and you're not hearing one concern for the children.
Uh and we still to this day do not know what Foley actually did.
If he ever met any of these pages, if he ever touched one of them, it's uh it's merely an instant message and uh and email scandal.
Meanwhile, the coordin the uh the attacks are totally coordinated.
Sunday afternoon, Harry Reed sent out a demand for the attorney general to investigate the Foley scandal.
That was after the DNC sent out a demand asking why Tom Reynolds covered up Congressman Foley's so-called sex crimes.
Then this organization called Crew has called for the House to appoint an outside counsel to investigate the Foley scandal.
And then Democracy 21 called on the House Ethics Committee to appoint an outside council to investigate House Republican leaders and their handling of the Foley scandal.
Meanwhile, after the this is a pure coordinated assault.
And I'm gonna tell you what I think is going on.
I think the Clinton war room is back up in full speed.
I think the how long has this Foley stuff been known by people?
We're talking about last year, earlier this year.
Look how long they held the National Intelligence estimate before leaking it during this campaign.
The situation with Janine Pierrot in New York now, all of her financial records have been subpoenaed by the U.S. Attorney's Office in Manhattan.
Tell you what I think about that, just as a little aside.
I actually think that they got to Janine because they're bugging Bernard Carrick.
And I think they were bugging Bernard Carrick to get Rudy.
I think they were bugging Bernard Carrick to find out some dirt on Rudy, because the Clinton war room strategy and the and the whole Bill and Hillary political strategy is not just defeat your political opponents, but destroy them.
And so Foley is here being destroyed.
Delay was destroyed, not merely defeated.
George Allen, they're attempting to destroy.
Janine Pirro, they're attempting to destroy.
It's a pattern.
And, of course, the willing accomplices in the drive-by media are just salivating over this.
Meanwhile, while all this is going on, Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, will vote for the next Speaker of the House after the elections.
He's not going anywhere.
Pelosi uh did ask him to resign, but uh but he said, nope, not going anywhere, and they didn't push.
They didn't force the issue.
Uh so they did a perfunctory little demand that William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, hit the highway, but uh Congressman Jefferson said nope, uh I'm I'm going nowhere, and that's that.
And he is uh he's still there.
Uh the circumstances here with uh with Foley are what they are, and they're they're they're indefensible.
Uh and I'm not even going to uh try that that that's not the that's not the point.
I want to try to explain um why why this is is happening, ladies and gentlemen.
This is a this is a uh circumstance here where everybody's saying uh well, aren't the Democrats being rather hypocritical?
And the Democrats say, aren't the Republicans being rather hypocritical?
This is this is the way this shakes out, and it's always been the case.
There is a different standard for Republicans.
As far as the left is concerned, uh the left, the Democrats look at uh at conservatives and Republicans in the following fashion.
Well, these guys are family values types, they're all for law and order, and they're always judging everybody else.
But then the liberal view, it's not possible for them to be hypocrites because they eschew all judgment.
They uh they don't like judgment against themselves, and whenever the people they look at as the uh as the judgers, the people engaging in judgment, have uh the normal human failings, the liberals and the left pile right on it and call them hypocrites.
Uh you know, Republicans are said to be racist and sexist and bigoted and homophobic.
Uh the liberal policy, liberal philosophy, is to assume bad behavior, bad human behavior.
They assume it.
They have a condescending look toward uh people in general.
It's what makes them liberals.
People are incapable of doing the right thing without liberals' guidance, people are incapable of making the right decisions to get ahead in life without liberal guidance, they're incapable of earning a decent living.
Uh and when uh when these people don't vote for liberals, then those people also become stupid.
Liberalism assumes bad human behavior and then coddles it as imperfect.
And after they coddle imperfect uh bad human behavior, uh they are able to say those who judge imperfections in people uh and come out strong for right and wrong, the simplistic black and white, uh good versus evil, uh, people who come out for uh law and order and so forth, they're the sinners.
Because none of us are perfect.
The liberals understand this, they coddle the imperfections, they create victims out of those who are imperfect, turning them into a cause celeb and blaming uh the right, uh these these draconian uh intolerant, inflexible people who judge others while ignoring their own foibles.
Uh this explains why the liberals are able to accept genocide in places like Iraq if it furthers their agenda.
Is everybody's you know, every everybody's uh flawed.
Uh Saddam Hussein's flawed, and he's just a bad guy.
We understand that.
We need to understand this about uh about people.
They expect the worst from people.
And they want the worst from people tolerated, and that is a sign of compassion.
When you look at the absolute dregs of society, worthless shreds of human debris, or other people who are simply imperfect in one way or which we all are, by the way, they want to tolerate this as a sign of compassion.
Their view of conservatives and Republicans is that we are intolerant of anybody who's not like us.
And so we must be made to pay the price for holding a standard.
I'm not going to do that.
That they do not.
They hate being just I give you a quick illustration.
When Clinton was uh elected and during the uh week leading up to the inaugural, I've told you this story before.
They had all these parties and ceremonies and uh little little uh get-togethers on the mall in Washington.
They had people like Aretha Franklin in there to sing and other big lib time uh entertainers.
And the list of songs they were singing were songs uh like We Shall Overcome or We Got Out of Jail Today, all because a liberal Democrat had been elected after the twelve years of the judgmentalism of the Reagan and Bush years.
They actually felt freed from a a uh uh a straitjacket of judgment where they knew they came up short.
They don't want to be judged, and they love to go after those who do the judging when there are foibles among those on that side of the aisle.
It's as simple as what I have been saying.
Power, no matter what, uh uh is is to get their way.
Uh power, no matter what, nothing is to get in their way, nothing of reacquiring it.
Uh the truth is that the people on the left who are acting all outraged and stunned and they don't see what Clinton or Barney Frank or Gary Studs did as repugnant.
In fact, they view those things as private matters that didn't affect anybody's work.
And it's nobody's business what somebody does with their private life, particularly when it comes to sex.
Now we all think this is hypocritical on their part, but they don't look at it as being hypocritical at all because the party of Mark Foley to them is the party of judgment.
And who gave them the right to judge anybody, even though the liberals are the ones that do all the judging and genuin most people to incompetence and failure.
As I say, they don't find what Mark Foley did repugnant.
They're not upset about that.
They just see this as an opportunity, folks.
It's an opportunity to once again gin up hatred and anti-voting uh patterns for the Republicans in all of this.
They still can't tell us what they believe in.
They still can't tell us what their policy in Iraq is.
They still can't tell us what they're going to do about domestic problems such as immigration.
They don't dare.
They still do not give people a reason to vote for them.
They are on the war path trying to get as much hate and vilification as they feel revved up in the general population for Republicans.
And George W. Bush.
It's no accident that the uh the Woodward book is out now.
Woodward even admits his objective was not to get the truth out.
His objective was to get the book out prior to the elections.
And he's done that.
Remember, they can't possibly find what Foley did repugnant.
They have defended it before when on their side.
On the other hand, you got Bob Livingston and Newt and a list of others who resign over such things.
Uh the left celebrated for such things.
Clinton is still held up as a guy a lot of liberal Democrat women would love to have some private time with.
As long as he's good at hammering Republicans and hammering the GOP and now hammering Fox News.
You think this is an accident.
They're going after Fox News before the election.
It's kind of stupid, if you ask me, but they um they still are.
Don't forget Nina Burley, Who once said she'd give Clinton a BJ just for keeping abortion legal?
Uh so there's there's no this idea that they find the behavior of Mark Foley repugnant and unacceptable is just BS.
All this is is an opportunity that they've been waiting for.
People have known about this obviously for a long time.
You wonder how ABC got these emails five weeks before the election?
You wonder why Janine Pierre's being subpoenaed by the U.S. attorney?
You wonder why George Allen's being destroyed on the front page of the Washington Post for two to three weeks, while the racial epithets uttered by his opponent go practically unnoticed.
It's a campaign.
The Clinton war room is in full speed operation.
They cannot afford to lose this election and 08.
Back after this.
Stay with us.
I have my suspicions about all this because I know the liberals, like every square inch of my glorious naked body, not just the back of my hand.
Now what do we have here?
We have uh really the instant messages are the big deal, not the emails, emails are sort of mild.
It's those IMs uh that got published.
And how old was this page when those uh IMs are going back and forth?
Seven sixteen to seventeen years old, something like that.
Now, uh I just have to ask the question because I don't know.
I'm not around sixteen or seventeen-year-olds.
Uh but how many of them save instant messages like that?
Uh just on their own.
What I'm getting at is uh it is not beyond the realm of possibility here at all that this was a setup uh from the get-go, because of what people have known about Mark Foley's sexual orientation as they're now saying uh for many years.
Here's a supposedly ostensibly safe seat.
Here we are in the election campaign with the Clinton war room in full speed operation, and all of a sudden, things that people have known for a long time suddenly surface once again thanks to our old buddy Brian Ross at uh at ABC.
Now, if you've got a sixteen or seventeen year old page genuinely scared and frightened about all this, save the stuff.
It's embarrassing.
What if somebody sees this outside of who you intend to see it?
I'm just thinking out loud here.
What if somebody got to the page?
So, you know, we want you to set foley up.
Wouldn't you do a little titillating thing here, keep it and save it and so forth?
How would you get a kid to do that?
Yeah, who knows?
You threaten him or pay him, as any number of ways, uh, given the kind of people that we're dealing with and talking about here.
Uh now, folks, uh, I don't want to be misunderstood here.
I'm not trying to mount any kind of a defense.
That's a bad word.
I'm not trying to uh uh uh get into a defense of what Mark Foley did.
Please don't misunderstand.
I'm just telling you that the the orgy and the orgasm that has been taking place in the media since Friday and with the Democrats, uh is is it's all coordinated and it's all it's all oriented toward the election.
There's no concern about the kid, no concern about the children.
Uh there is there is there's not even any real uh problem with what Foley did, as we've discussed.
Then they're in their hearts and minds and their crotches, they don't have any uh problem with what Foley did.
They've defended it over the uh over the years.
Now, according to the New York Times, the FBI has begun a preliminary investigation into these emails of Mark Foley and the page and these uh instant messages.
And the Speaker of the House, Denny Hastert, has asked a question.
Since the communications appear to have existed for three years, there should be an investigation into the extent that there are persons who knew or had possession of these messages, but did not report them to the appropriate authorities.
This is uh from a letter that Hastert sent to the Justice Department.
He said, It is important to know who may have had the communications and why they were not given to prosecutors before now.
Well, that's uh that's a great, great point.
I don't know about you, but especially during a heated election season, uh, I don't believe in coincidence.
And Hassart Hastard is raising the uh uh uh point uh himself in his letter to the to the Justice Department.
Uh I I uh the timing of all of this.
I mean, who benefits from the timing of all this?
You always look at that, or I always do, who benefits from this?
Um this this this has more to do uh uh uh about helping Nancy Pelosi in the House Democrats than protecting teenagers uh with with whom Foley was communicating.
What Why, I mean, if if if they've known about this, as people are saying for all these years, then where is the concern for the children?
Where is the concern for what was going on with this page?
Unless they knew.
There's just too much happening here of this.
And I'm going to, folks, I'll tell you what, this is not anywhere near the end.
We've got five weeks to go, and I am sure that there are other things in their hopper, that they're going to be, whoa, looky here breaking news that has been planned for months.
I have no idea what.
There's a coordinated assault on Fox News now.
David Balder, the Associated Press has a hit piece on Fox News, and there was the most ridiculous piece in the New York Times week and review section on Fox News yesterday that it's all about how Democrats are fighting back, finally fighting back at Fox News.
It's it though the premise of that is mind-boggling to me.
But they're trying to rev up their base.
They're going to end up revving up the Republican base as well at the same time.
Be right back.
Stay with us.
I had a great weekend with some friends talking about all this stuff, and uh I made the point, I think the Clinton war room is back in action.
I Carville and Bigala out there with their new book, uh acting juvenile wherever they go.
Uh uh and they just it's just it's a pure 100% smear and destroy machine.
Somebody said, What where are the Republicans on this?
You know, how how come the Republicans don't have a war room type operation?
And I said, come on.
You're asking this after all these years that this kind of stuff is the Republicans couldn't smear a bagel with cream cheese if they had to.
It's just it's not who they are.
It's not it's not how they play the game.
Look, they're not circling the wagons around uh around Foley, they're they're they're not doing anything.
They're on the they're on the cutting edge of uh hounding a guy out of town just as much as the as the Democrats are.
And you can't help but think about about this stuff like uh uh Clinton.
I mean, if if Clinton had a fraction of uh uh a sense of responsibility, uh, such as Delay or or or even Foley, uh he would have resigned within an hour of the allegations of Lewinsky or the Kathleen Willie revelations, maybe even the Juanita Broderick uh revelations.
And if Mark Foley behaved the way Bill Clinton behaves, Foley would still be in the House trying to smear the ABC reporters and threatening to revoke the broadcast license.
He'd be calling Bob Iger at ABC, trying to get the story retracted, uh, and he would get as many of his cronies in his office in a Republican Party helping him out, getting back to smear.
Instead, he just quit.
He said, I'm out of here.
And and one of the things I actually think his resignation has anger to Democrats.
Because by quitting, he's gone.
I mean, they can't talk about him anymore.
Now they've they have to make this a Republican-wide scandal.
If Foley were still there, and if Foley were fighting this the way Bill Clinton would fight it, or the way Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana would fight it, why he would remain a huge target and they would be and they're still digging deep into his past, the FBI looking at all this, but he's sort of taking himself off the radar, checked into rehab uh supposedly here because of uh uh an alcohol problem.
You know, I mean it's just it's sort of comical to watch this.
The liberals show all this mock horror at the comparison uh because the pages were underage.
Uh but I don't know if he ever touched one.
Has anybody, am I missing something here?
Is there been a story yet that he ever met the page or touched the page in any of these suggestive ways uh made public in the instant messages?
Now, this group crew, and I I forget what this stands for, but they're part of the coordinated effort, C R EW.
Uh they have had a crucial role in the in the uh revelation of what Foley's instant messages were.
And this is pretty well timed.
I don't know, as I say, like Haster, I don't believe in coincidences.
Uh it turns out that this group crew has been behind the demands for investigations of Kurt Weldon, Tom Delay, Sam Johnson, Richard Pumbo From uh California, San Torum, Roy Blunt, Bill Frist, Saxby Chambliss, Richard Shelby, Charles Taylor, a lot of other Republicans.
Uh, and then they also demanded an investigation of Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, after it became clear the guy's a crook.
Uh but of course that that allows them to say, hey, we are not partisan here.
We are uh we're we're nonpartisan people.
Now, this outfit crew is an IRS designated 501 C3 not-for-profit group.
That means it's tax exempt based on its representation to the government that it isn't political.
But they've gotten money from George Soros' open society and a lot of other extremely wealthy leftists.
The um the the bottom line with all this is once again, don't be fooled.
They don't find what Foley did the slightest bit wrong.
They just see it as an opportunity to trash uh yeah, citizens for responsibility and ethics in Washington.
That's what crew is.
I was having uh having a mental block out there.
Nevertheless, this is just an opportunity for them to point fingers at the people they think are holier than now, uh, the party of law and order, the party of right and wrong, uh the Christian right, uh the moral.
And and as such, this I say there's a different standard.
The liberals never make themselves out to be clean and pure as the wind-driven snow.
They never set themselves out to be anything superb in any of those areas, so when they have their failings, nobody can really accuse them of uh of hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy is their main weapon here that they're that they're using in this uh in this effort to discredit the entire Republican Party, and they're really feeling their oats.
I've seen some of their people on TV over the weekend, and they are energized to the point of being angry.
Uh but we'll just see.
I you know, the Abramov scandal was announced last week, or not on it was there was an update in it.
Somehow 400 and some odd contacts in the White House with uh with Carl Rove, and I don't think anybody cares.
The the Abramov scandal has has sort of worn itself out.
The the emotional reservoir that people have for that sort of thing is uh uh pretty pretty narrow and it's not deep, and it's already been um it's already been spent.
I didn't get the impression that was a big deal.
They tried to make it a big deal.
I think when it comes to Abramov type scandals, most people that vote in this country assume that that's standard operating procedure in Washington.
I mean, when was the last time lobbyists were popular?
Really?
When was the last time lobbyists were popular?
They haven't been popular in a long time.
The idea that there are people like Abramoff running around is a shock.
And of course, sex scandals in Washington, pfft, not new.
Page scandals, not new.
Uh I I think they're in the process of overplaying their their hand here.
Because once again, in all of this, we still don't hear what they're for.
We still don't hear what they're gonna do when they reclaim their power, uh, other than they're gonna do things smarter.
But they don't have uh an agenda that they dare announce.
Let's go to the phone.
Cynthia in St. Louis.
Uh your first, nice to have you with us on the EIB network today.
Hi.
Hi, Russ.
I just want to say, as a uh conservative Democrat who's been disappointed with both parties for a long time, but still votes Republican.
I've actually considered setting it out this year because I began to see uh distinctions without much of a difference.
I've become disillusioned with the Republicans also, until now.
There are so many implications about this, most of which you've covered.
The one that really stands out in my mind, which is why I voted for Republicans in the first place, which is the hypocrisy of the Democrats when all this is going on with Cl with Bill Clinton, as far as Kathleen Willie, right Juanita Broderick, and Paula Jones.
They were trailer trash, drag a dollar through a trailer park, nuts and sluts, all this stuff.
That's what the Democrats did to the what I believe were real victims of Bill Clinton.
However, you don't hear a peep out of the Republicans saying anything about these angelic 16 and 17-year-olds, which I doubt very sincerely.
They're not standing behind Mark Foley.
I don't think he did anything criminal.
That remains to be seen.
It was tawdry, but I applaud them for not doing both of those.
For nothing victims and not standing behind Foley.
That's an that's an interesting point.
I remember James Carville uh made the comment you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll pick up, i.e.
Paula Jones.
Uh they did try to destroy the reputations of any of the well they had a whole bimbo eruptions unit that Betsy Wright headed up early in the 1990s into the campaign of 1992.
And any time these women came up, it was search and destroy, it was destroy them.
Uh and And there were a lot of them, and the the ones that they did destroy sent a message to the other ones to stay quiet.
Look what'll happen to you.
If the Republicans were the same, we'd be trying to find his page, drag him through the mud, find out everything about this kid, talk about how he was this or that and the other thing.
Set poor old Congressman Foley up why all these people telling lies about Congressman Foley.
Why this is unconscionable.
We can't you're right.
X excellent point.
The um uh Republicans are not circling the wagons around foley and are not going after the accuser like the uh the Clintons make a habit of doing.
Excellent, excellent observation out there, Cynthia.
I appreciate it.
Dennis, you bet, Dennis in Chicago, your next.
Great to have you with us today, sirs.
We kick off a brand new broadcast week.
Hi, Russ.
Uh I'm proud to be one of your uh over 20 million well-informed listeners.
Um I I agree with your analysis, but but you're spending it a little.
I mean, we should expect more from Republicans than this, and and and you and others that have a lot of influence should go after whoever covered this up.
I mean, why we expect Bill Clinton to go and do what they do and what's the right thing.
Wait, who's covering it up?
I'm not well, there are probably people within in Haftert's office.
They're saying that Hastert's uh staffers may have known about this for quite some time, and we should expect more.
The Democrats we expect this behavior from that we don't expect it from Republicans.
I don't think you're getting it from Republicans.
That's that's the point.
Cynthia in St. Louis, I think, made a uh a great point.
There's a tremendous difference.
Now, I I saw Newt right before the program started, I saw Newt was on one of the cable channels.
They asked him about this.
I think that they didn't know the extent of this.
I think a year ago somebody was dispatched to talk to Foley to shut this down, it was dangerous, it was improper, and they thought they had it handled.
Um we'll have to wait and see who knew what when, but don't don't forget, Democrats knew a lot too about what was going on and the timing of all this.
You know, it's it's it's um it can't be it can't be divorced in the circumstance.
The Republicans are not trying to cover this up, and they're not trying to back out of it, and they're not trying to I mean they're leading the call for the investigation into all this.
But you don't you don't think you're forced into doing that?
I mean, uh I'm sure they've known like you said, they've known about this and and shouldn't tolerate it.
This is the party that's in charge of national security, and people expect no plan from the Democrats.
They expect the Democrats to behave like this.
It's part of just who they are, but we we the Republicans and the staffers should not tolerate this.
Well, this is why, you know, I don't uh when I said at the very beginning of the program.
There is a there's a double standard for Republicans because they do portray themselves as the party of loyalty and uh loyal loyal uh uh law and order, and they portray themselves as uh uh the party of morality, what with the uh Christian right and so forth.
Uh but I you know I think I if you look at this, it seems to me the Republicans are not being tolerant of this at all.
Uh it it's quite a comparison between the way the Democrats deal with all this and the way the Republicans do.
And in the context of what's happening here, going into the election, don't look at this as spin.
I mean, I've the the Democrats are trying to create an impression about Republicans that isn't true as they always do.
They are engaged in personal seek uh seek and destroy uh smear missions here, and they've got willing accomplices in the drive-by media that help them do it at each and every turn.
And this is a um uh an opportunity here, uh opportunity.
It it's a circumstance I think that demands that uh Republicans, you know, be the right thing morally, which they're doing here, but understand the game that's being played.
Uh we're gonna learn more about the timing of all this as the uh uh in the coming days.
Just I want to warn you, Dennis, this is not the last of these so-called uh revelations, breaking news stories.
I think the entire campaign season from here on out is going to feature a number of things like this.
I think they're laying in wait.
I think they're categorized, I think they're on a list.
Uh they've been, you know, doing opposition research, have this stuff ready to go, uh, and it there's gonna be, you know, released in a systematic way, timed to just overwhelm the voting population with um negative ideas and thoughts about the very existence and humanity Of Republicans.
We'll be back after this.
Stay with us, my friends.
Don't go away.
Now look, folks, you have to understand this thing that's happening with Foley is not in a vacuum.
Look at George Allen.
Delay.
There's a political indictment, pure and simple.
National Intelligence Estimate.
This is what the Democratic Party exists to do.
It exists as this kind of an operation.
It's not a party that puts forth ideas.
It's not a party that's willing to debate those ideas.
It's not a party.
They have to destroy, discredit, smear their opponents who they feel will beat them, embarrass them, humiliate them, or what have you.
Now, on the other hand, you people, some of you people out there think that I'm spinning and I'm you you missed the point.
Let's t take a look at the case of Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana.
How long did it take for Nancy Pelosi and a couple others in the House to make a superficial perfunctory request that he resign.
And what did it take?
It took finally a government document that he had $90,000 in cold cash in his freezer.
But remember how that document came out.
Remember that the Justice Department raided his office.
And what did the Republicans do?
Sided with the Democrats.
Sided with Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana, rather than rammed William Jefferson down the throats of the libs and demanded he get out of the House for activity that is embarrassing and beneath the dignity of the House of Representatives, whatever the hell they want to say.
They're just too damn stupid.
They join with the Democrats to whine about justice Justice Department getting the records of Congressman William Jefferson, Democrat Louisiana.
All on the basis that the House is Sancrossack, separation of powers.
We can't have the Justice Department coming in here, executive branch, or what have you.
That's why I say they they they couldn't smear a bagel if you gave them the cream cheese.
It's just not who they are.
It's never going to happen.
Republicans are not going to recruit a bunch of lawyers who do nothing but go out and try to destroy Democrats.
They're just not going to do it.
Republicans have this quaint little old-fashioned notion that elections are about issues.
And that they're going to run on those.
But a little programming note...
Jim Garrity, uh, who has a blog at National Review Online called the Carry Spot.
He actually got it started during the run up to the 04 election.
Uh, and the uh the blog has survived and Garrity has a book.
It came out September 19th called Voting to Kill.
And the central premise of the book is that people are going to vote this election.
He's gone out and talked to them on security, national security.
It's going to be interesting to ask him about this today if he if he still holds to his theory given the shift.
The Democrats appear to have forgotten the war on terror and Iraq.
I mean, the Foley thing has just sent them through the roof.
Uh so I'll get it it'll be interesting to get his take.
He's joining us at the top of the next hour for a few minutes.
Paul in Dayton, Ohio.
Welcome to the program.
Nice to have you with us.
Rush Megadiddos from the heart of Buckeye Country.
Thank you, sir.
It's an honor to speak to you, sir.
Thank you, sir.
Rush, I would add that I mean this is a card that the Democrats have been well ready to play for a long time.
I think so.
I mean, this is uh just a little common sense is needed here.
I mean, everything that we're hearing at this was a this was common knowledge that the other pages knew about it, that the other uh the the the guy in the coat room, the supervisors, everyone knew about this.
So um You know, this is this is just a card that they've been ready to play for some time.
And and if in fact these allegations are correct, the guy needs to go down.
But you know, no, no, no, no, no.
He's no no bad, bad, bad choice of words.
Just say he needs to resign, which he has.
Yeah, absolutely.
Absolutely.
But if the uh again, I would contend that that a lot of people knew about this.
This is a card they've been ready to play for some time.
And you know, I've been I've been instant messaging for years, and I can't recall one instant message that I've ever saved.
Well, let me you you you use Windows?
Absolutely.
I don't, so I don't know.
Does Windows automatically save those things, or can you tell it to save them if you want to?
Uh I don't know how if they do, I don't know how to do it.
Now, and I'm I'm a pretty giggy geeky couple of.
But I know you can I know you could cut and paste them if you wanted to save some.
You cut it and paste it, put it in a word processor program.
Um You can.
Okay, you can save the whole chat.
All right.
So you have to make an effort to do that.
It doesn't do it automatically.
All right, interesting.
All right, thanks.
Thanks out there, Paul.
Quick timeout.
We'll be back, folks.
Roll right on after.
Okay, Jim Garrity, the book Voting to Kill coming up.
Uh relevant to the Foley episode and the upcoming elections.
That's exactly what the book is about.
On what will people vote in November?
Sit tight.
▲
Export Selection