All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:24
October 3, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 Podcast.
Hiya, folks, and greetings.
Welcome to you, thrill seekers, music lovers.
Conversationalists all across the fruited plane.
Time for broadcast excellence, hosted by me, America's real anchor man here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
As always, a thrill and a delight to be with you to each day get the truth out, set the record straight, and bring perspective to the madness created by the drive-by media.
Telephone number 800-282-2882 and the email address rush at EIBNet.com, State Run Radio, saying a commercial airliner has been hijacked over Greek airspace.
Turkish Airlines spokesman is saying that that aircraft, the hijacked aircraft, has landed at an airport in uh Brindisi, Italy.
There is no confirmation yet whether Mark Foley or Carl Rove are involved in the hijacking of this uh jet.
I guess it's a Turkish Airlines jet.
We're following the story here, and as soon as we get any information, we will pass it on to you.
As you know, the um there are elements of the Republican slash conservative base that are cracking and crashing.
Among them the Washington Times in an editorial today demanding that the uh Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert, resign.
Also, our friends at the Wall Street Journal getting a little nervous over all this.
Uh and uh remember, folks, there's a there's a lot of behind-the-scenes politics going on uh about all this.
By the way, Speaker Hastert has said through his spokesman he will not step down despite the request or the call from the Washington Times.
Uh and I hope he does more than just say through a spokesman, I'm not gonna resign.
It's time for the Republicans to fight back here, folks.
This is getting absurd.
This constantly being on defense, awaiting for the next shoe to drop.
It is time for the Republicans to fight back and point out, and it should be led by Hastert, point out how the Democrats continue to avoid the real issues of importance that we as a nation face.
Continually allowing the American people are trying to distract the American people from what essentially uh is a non-existent agenda on the part of the Democrats to deal with things that really, really matter.
The idea that the House of Representatives is uh is uh the GOP side of it is uh is a bunch of perverts hitting on pages uh is absurd.
Uh it is the Democrats who have condoned that kind of behavior in the past.
It's Democrats who don't find that behavior repugnant in any way, shape, manner, or form.
This is not about protecting the children as far as they're concerned.
This is a strategic attack, time during an election, and the Republicans don't have to sit there and take it.
You know, they can say we didn't know, they can say whatever they want to say about it, but then return fire.
The president's doing his bit.
The president's on a campaign trip, he's out west, he was in Reno.
Uh, he's uh he's been in Stockton, California, or as they say on PBS out there, Stockton.
Uh well, they do.
They got a PBS station out in Sacramento, then it's licensed for both markets.
And I forget where the call letters are, you know, the K KPBS, I don't know what it is, Sacramento Stockton.
You know, these uh elitists smarter than everybody else in a room types.
But nevertheless, presence out there.
Uh, he's campaigning for John Doolittle and Richard Pomball, and the president is continuing to pound the message that the Democrats will uh uh lessen the safety of this country, that there will not be the attention of national security, country can't be trusted in their hands, uh, is doing his part on this.
Uh drive-by media not covering any of this.
Local media in California, Nevada is.
Uh, but the Foley thing is all over everywhere.
And I don't care where you look on cable TV, you have people salivating over what this will mean to the Republicans' chances of holding on to the House, of course.
And the conventional wisdom is that uh the Foley's seat will go Democrat.
Uh, the replacement candidates, a guy named Joe Negron.
He's how he pronounced his name Negrun.
I think it's uh he'll be on uh well, he won't be on the ballot.
Foley's name will be on the ballot in his district uh because the ballots have already been printed and you can't, or they've been entered into the electronic voting machines, which Democrats say we can't trust.
Uh Whatever is the uh is the case, can't change the name uh on the ballot or in the machine, so people are gonna have to go out and vote for Foley, even though they're gonna actually be voting for uh Mr. Negron.
Uh and even Mr. Snurdley is a fatalist on this, thinks there's no way that the Republicans hold this seat, that people aren't going to go in there and vote for a candidate named Mark Foley, given all of this.
But in fact, if they go in there and they won't be voting on Foley, Mr. Snerdley.
I'm not so sure that uh the Republicans have held this seat in this district for 25 years.
Uh I'll I'll be, you know, I'll I'm I'm gonna go on the I will be surprised if they lose the seat.
Republicans in this district aren't idiots.
Uh and this is part of the thinking, and we we still have this mindset that uh that uh our voters are a bunch of fools and idiots, and and and whatever the media bubble of the day is affects them, and that they respond to all this.
I think uh I think just the opposite, and I think the Democrats are gonna continue to overplay their hand on this, and I think there are going to be other scandals that drop that come out of the Clinton war room.
Uh they'll give this one as as as much time as they think it needs.
They'll overreact.
Uh they'll uh they'll take it too far.
But some of the some of the internal politics going on, Washington Times Wall Street Journal, let's be honest.
You've read it, I've told you about it.
There are a lot of quote conservative pundits, unquote, who actually believe that it would be good medicine for the Republicans to lose the house.
Because they've done such a horrible job.
They've spent way too much, they don't do enough on immigration, they've totally bolloced all this up.
It's time to kick them out.
It's time to teach them a lesson.
It's time to show them that we're not going to put up with them not being conservative.
And so if they lose, fine.
And I I think that uh, you know, there's uh uh, you know, some people over the Wall Street Journal would uh probably not mind if Hastert quit.
They'd like uh uh Mike Pence and Jeff What's a guy from Arizona to take over the House uh because uh, you know, they're they're they're not as strong on illegal immigration as Sens and Brenner and and Hastert and so forth uh are.
But you know, I I I just I I think it's time for offense on this.
Uh Washington Times, by the way, uh I don't know if you saw this story.
This is from September 28th.
The human resources director of the Washington Times has been arrested on charges of soliciting a teenager for sex on the internet.
Did you know about this?
DC police say that 53-year-old Randall Cassiday of Dobbs Ferry, New York was arrested Tuesday night in uh Northeast Washington.
He had allegedly arranged to meet uh what he believed was a 13-year-old girl he had been corresponding with in an online chat room.
The uh person he was communicating with was a detective with the Department's Internet Crimes Against Children branch.
Now, I love Tony Blankley, and we've interviewed him for the limbaugh letter.
I have a lot of respect for have known him since he uh worked for Newt.
But did he resign from the Washington Times?
Uh when uh when the uh human resources director.
Human resort, do you know what you know what human resources people do?
Uh they monitor all this kind of stuff, make sure the employees aren't out catting around, handle all the benefits, the payouts, uh, all the nanny state stuff like health insurance, family medical leave act, trips to the vet on the part of mom and dad, getting old grandma and grandpa in the old folks home on work time, whatever it is, they handle that sort of stuff.
But I don't remember uh Mr. Blankly resigning uh over this.
Yet they're demanding that Hastert step down again.
Hastert has refused to do so.
The bottom line is this this this latest assault by Democrats will not work either unless the Republicans surrender, stay on defense, and damage themselves.
Let the Democrats resign for crying out loud.
Let them resign over some.
Let Nancy Pelosi resign.
I can make a case that she should resign.
Immediately.
Now, even Snerdley's looking at me with a raised eyebrow.
Well, here's my basis.
Nancy Pelosi knows the person who planted the story about Foley five weeks before the election.
But Rush, but Rush, but Rush, tell us what you know.
How can you be sure she knows?
Well, I can almost guarantee it.
She might not know who specifically did it, but she knows where it comes from.
All the liberal Democrats do.
She knows the person because this these emails were held by a liberal.
They were planted by a liberal, and they were timed to the 2006 election cycle by a liberal and liberals know liberals.
And so Pelosi knows who Deep I am is.
There's a deep I am here, and not Deep Throat, but there's a deep I am.
Now you know who I've I've been trying to find out who this is.
Who is this?
Is it an angry gay group that's upset that Foley was not a good gay?
Could it be that they didn't like that Foley was uh not out?
That Foley was gay, but he was not out, is trying to act like he wasn't.
Uh you can go to certain websites and you can find pictures, screenshots of gay websites from 2004 pledging to get Foley, pledging to out him, because he's doing damage to gay uh and lesbian uh people, gay men, lesbian women uh throughout the country.
Uh who knows who's behind this?
There's another theory uh that uh well I'm not gonna there's all kinds of theories about who had this for how long they had it, and then who gave it to Brian Ross at AB's and Brian Ross says, Well, yeah, they gave me this stuff some time ago, but I was too involved in uh in trashing the Bush administration uh in our Katrina anniversary coverage.
Now, this is what it is.
This is a strategic Democrat timed scandal.
None of this is to defend Foley.
Some people on our side are totally missing the boat.
I understand the need to stand up righteously and morally and say we, as conservatives, do not tolerate, and we will not put up with this kind of behavior from members of our movement or our party.
I understand all it.
Foley should go.
There's no question.
I'm not I couldn't, couldn't really care.
This is really not about him anymore.
This is about the Democrat attempt to take over the House, and we have people who uh want to go further and not recognize what this really is and not understand the Democrat Clinton war room strategy behind all this are unwittingly falling into the hands of of uh of the Democrats.
There's almost a uh a death wish out there.
This is hardball politics.
This is not about the children.
This is not about pedophilia, this is not about any of that.
Uh the way this has happened, the way it is played out.
Foley's gone.
I mean, if you if it was really about Foley, there stop the coverage.
Issue's over.
We found out, however, we found out Foley's gone.
Foley's in rehab, Foley's gone, doing whatever he's doing, he's out.
Conservatives have stood up and done the right thing.
Foley quit.
He didn't do a Jerry Studs, and you know what studs did when he had from Massachusetts.
Studs call a press conference with the page that he had been accused of uh having this little trist, and they demanded privacy.
And they said, It's our business, none of yours, blah blah blah.
And they went on and got re-elected.
Foley didn't do any of that.
He's gone.
So if it's just about that, it's time for conservatives to say, see, we clean our house, we do the right thing.
But then to go further and say, well, the Hastert should be resigned.
Why not baehner?
Let's have Boehner resign.
Let's have everybody resign.
Let's just have the Republicans give up.
You know what?
Let's just have everybody on the Republican side quit and resign.
Why not?
How far do we take this?
I don't think people understand the uh the war and the and and the battle field mentality of things like this.
Uh either that or they do understand it and don't care, or they think it's irrelevant to the uh to the uh fundamental issues they think are involved.
Anyway, I'm a little long here.
I must take a brief time out.
Back uh with more broadcast excellence after this.
You know what I'd love to see?
I'd love to see this announcement.
Breaking news.
The drive-by media.
Barney Frank nominates former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter to get to the bottom of the Foley miss.
I just would love to see that.
By the way, we here at the EIB network, ladies and gentlemen, have started an office pool.
Because I told you yesterday, this is just the tip of the iceberg.
There's gonna be strategic releases of scandal-related so-called scandal-related news uh from now through the election.
And we have a little office pool here on when the next shoe will drop, what the next story will be.
Uh I have my money on 3 p.m. after this program, Friday afternoon.
Time to make the Sunday shows.
I don't know what it'll be.
I just know that the Clinton war room has got a bunch of stuff cooked up.
Look what they've already ensnared.
They've insnared George Allen.
They got Janine Pierrot up in New York.
They're trying to get uh we got Bob Woodward's book, then make no mistake the timing of that, the things that are we're gonna talk about that today because actually some interesting uh things in that Woodward book that I think uh kind of make an opposite point that the Libs and Woodward want to make uh that ought to please Democrats uh in a set.
Rich Lowry touches on this a little bit today in his piece at uh National Review Online.
Frank Gaffney has a great piece in the Washington Times if he hasn't resigned.
Uh for I don't know why sure, but he th Washington Times human resources director uh had to quit soliciting sex on the internet with thirteen-year-old babe.
Nobody there has resigned over this, and I haven't seen the conservative blogosphere upset with the Washington Times as an institution uh claiming that it maybe just should shut down because of the actions of their human uh resources director.
So my money is on three o'clock Friday for a uh a new uh news story, a new uh new scandal coming out of the Clinton war room.
If you have it at a chance, you ought to go to Rush Limbaugh.com.
We have a great graphic up there depicting the Clinton war room and its victims uh to date.
And make no mistake, that's that's what's happening.
Let's go to the audio sound bites.
This is interesting, knew this would be the case.
I'm the only one saying anything different about this yesterday, and so I knew that I would be the focal point of discussion last night on the cable shows, PMS NBC Scarborough Country talking with the new republic's Michael Crowley.
And Joe Scarborough says Rush Limbaugh says the Clinton war room is in full effect, and then he played audio from yesterday's program.
The truth is that the people on the left who are acting all outraged and stunned and angry.
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.
Michael Crowley, I don't buy that argument, do you?
No, I mean it's ridiculous.
I mean, first of all, we're talking about minors here.
I mean, we're talking about sixteen-year-olds.
You know, so when the Clinton case, you know, it was clearly sort of a troubling age discrepancy, but it's completely different terrain.
Oddly enough, the age of consent is is only sixteen years old in D.C., but actually the laws governing online contact are different, and I and uh, and I think partly because of legislation that fully supported.
All right, so the the uh age of consent 16, the pages of 60, it doesn't matter, this is different.
And of course Clinton's totally different because Monica was 19.
Um we ignored studs altogether.
What is there to disagree with about?
Notice that they do not tackle the point that I made that the Democrats do not find this behavior repugnant.
That was the point that I was making yesterday.
They don't find what Foley did repugnant, because they didn't and he just admitted what Clinton didn't deal.
Clinton and Monica, I mean, that's that's everything I said here is true.
The Democrats circle the wagons, hey, it's private, hey, it's only about sex.
Hey, it didn't affect the way he did his job.
Uh now Foley then goes goes, I think, or Crowley goes on to sort of make my point.
Scarborough says then, well, thanks to Congressman Foley, he uh may now be in trouble with the FBI, right?
I would also just say that, you know, Republicans to some extent ask for this sort of a reaction because of their position on moral issues.
I mean, this constant drumbeat about family values and this very strict scolding approach to how people should live their lives, invites particularly high standards and harsh criticism when one of their own is caught in this sort of a situation.
So, you know, Crimea River Rush.
Hey, Crowley, why don't you become a journalist and listen to what I said?
I'm the one that made that point yesterday.
I don't know why Scarborough didn't play that, and let maybe his producers didn't hear it.
I made that very point.
What I said yesterday was that Republicans are vulnerable to this because they are the family values party, the family uh the the party of morality, right and wrong, and that liberals like you, Crowley, look at people that make judgments as the sinners.
You liberals, you coddle the imperfections of human beings.
You promote the imperfections of human beings, including alternative lifestyles, including sex with minors.
You including teaching sex in school with a condom on a cucumber, a banana, or peanut, whichever is appropriate.
Uh You guys coddled all of this imperfection in human behavior, and that's how you claim you're compassionate.
And when you coddle imperfection, you promote it.
And you have made those who engage in imperfect human behavior by choice, you have made them victims.
And of whom are they victims?
They are victims of the so-called right wing judgmental squad.
I pred I you tell me that you can cry me a river.
I should cry a river.
I'm not crying a river.
I'm not the one complaining about uh the things that you guys are complaining.
I know exactly why you claim that it's so much fun to watch hypocrites bite the dust.
You guys think you're immune from being hypocrites because you don't judge anybody and you despise being judged.
But it is your coddling of imperfection in human behavior by choice imperfection that leads to an ongoing perversion of our culture.
You guys have a lot of explaining to do.
Pops out of the radio, right at you, Rush Limbaugh, the EIB network.
And I'm gonna tell you something, you Democrats here, Libs, you are teetering very close to the edge, and a number of people are gonna think they're already starting to see you people as gay bashers.
I mean, and that's you know, it's it's if there's anybody bashing gays in this story, who is it?
Why, it's our old friends, the Democrats.
I want to go back to this first soundbite from the Scarborough show last night that I just played you.
Michael Crowley of the New Republic, Scarborough's question, Rush Limbaugh says that Clinton war room's in full effect, and they played this video audio from yesterday's program.
The truth is that the people on the left who are acting all outraged and stunned and angry, 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.
Michael Crowley, I don't buy that argument to you.
No, I mean it's ridiculous.
I mean, first of all, we're talking about minors here.
I mean, we're talking about 16-year-olds.
You know, so when the Clinton case, you know, is clearly sort of a troubling age discrepancy, but it's completely different terrain.
Oddly enough, the age of consent is is only sixteen years old in DC, but actually the laws governing online contact are different in I think partly because of legislation that fully supported.
All right, you know, this this uh this notice this ongoing effort to dissociate Clinton from any of this.
In fact, there are people on our side uh don't bring up Clinton, don't bring up Gary Studge.
Why we got our own problems here with Mark Foley.
And I think people on our side are saying that don't understand the mindset of those of us who are bringing it up because we're looking at Foley's gone, we've done with it.
We've dealt with it.
We got rid of whatever the problem was, he's gone.
That is the result of a Democrat trick.
That is the result of a Democrat strategy, and and so he's gone.
We've done the right thing.
Now we got to look at what the ongoing effort uh to get Foley is really aimed at.
So when you bring up Clinton, you know, these guys like Crowley here, these libs, they uh they put up the boundaries.
Oh no, no, Clinton's not relevant here.
Why?
Monica was 19.
Well, can I remind you, Libs, of something else?
Yeah, you can talk about uh whether the age of consent is sixteen or not for online things, uh, whatever.
But it should be noted to you libs that the sexual harassment activists and the feminists have made the main point that harassment occurs when there is contact between a person who has much greater power than his subordinate or victim.
That makes the contact non-consensual.
So who could be more powerful than the president of the United States, and who could be more vulnerable than an impressionable groupy intern working under him, literally.
Under him and under the desk.
He was the chief executive of the United States of America.
If he thinks it's okay to do it, what's an imper intern supposed to think?
You just can't erase Clinton here, but you don't even have to do this.
Uh Clinton was accused of rape by Juanita Broderick.
Nothing doesn't matter.
Private matter long ago, Rush.
Uh Can't trust the accuser.
Why not?
The woman is always right when she accuses her husband of predatory behavior.
The woman is always right when she accuses somebody of sexual harassment.
But somehow in Clinton, Kathleen Willie, Paula Jones, they were no, they were trailer trash.
They were what have my only point in bringing this up is not to defend foley.
It is not in any way, shape, manner, or form.
It is simply I'm not going to sit here and act on defense.
I'm not going to be put on defense by these people.
I'm not going to demand that guys on our side resign.
I'm not going to demand that we take action that guarantees we lose the House to a bunch of people who cannot be trusted to defend and protect the national security of these country.
It would it would take them in four years.
Do you know the damage they could do in four years, particularly if they win the White House in 08?
These people can destroy the health care system of this country.
They can destroy the effort to beat back the uh terrorist extremists, the Islamo fascists.
Charlie Wrangell is one Democrat who's being honest.
He's going to end up, if the House wins, uh the Democrats win House uh control, he'll be chairman of Ways and Means.
He was asked, is there any tax cut that you think ought to be preserved?
No, not one.
Can't think of any.
Uh what about the war in Iraq?
Well, um, have to pay for it, don't you?
I mean, Wrangell is making it clear.
He's gonna he's gonna get rid of tr all these tax cuts he can.
Now it's gonna be tough uh with Bush as president.
It depends on uh on majorities, what kind of cave mentality exists on the part of surviving Republicans in the House and the Senate if the Democrats do win both.
Uh so bye-bye tax cuts.
And by the way, the tax cuts and additional $500 billion in the last year alone, I think, to the Treasury.
Bush's tax cuts have generated something like that much additional revenue, if not more.
Uh so bye-bye tax cuts.
Uh bye-bye um war in Iraq, war on terror, defund it, what have you.
And Wrangell is making it plain what uh what his agenda is.
Now that to me is what's at stake here.
And I know there are people on our side who say, well, you know, our Republican uh House, they need to be shown a lesson.
These guys, they ran as conservatives and they got up there, they governed as uh a bunch of moderate uh spineless fish, and uh saw this spending and nothing on immigration and so forth and so on, and and we need to teach them a lesson.
They need to lose.
Uh I have never understood the philosophy of quitting to win.
I've just never understood it.
Nobody has ever explained how that works.
If if that works, then we should leave Iraq today and win.
Well, yeah, just leave.
We should uh we should just you know cancel all the elections.
Just tell our people not to show up.
Can't cancel the election.
Tell Republican voters, look, don't show up.
It's time our side lost.
This is how we win in the future.
This is how we I've heard this so many times in the past, and I it just it just appalls me because I don't understand the thinking.
I understand the anger on our side, and I understand the desire for payback, and I understand the desire for people to send a message to the uh Republican leaders in the House and the Senate with whom they are angry, uh, and the desire for those people to somehow get the message, and I also understand the desire for them not to be rewarded uh uh for this uh you know absolutely horrible performance that some think the uh House Republicans have uh have engaged in over the um past
two years, four years, or what have you.
But as I say, the the Democrats only need four years, and they can destroy the health care system, destroy the war effort, raise taxes, and let's not forget.
Let's not for the moment a Democrat is elected president.
There will be two immediate Supreme Court resignations.
At least one for certain.
Uh a couple of these people are holding on just because they don't want Bush appointing their replacement.
Uh so if you if you want to say goodbye to the uh Supreme Court, uh, actually uh having a fundamental change in its ideological orientation.
Uh and if you want to say goodbye to all that, then fine.
You go ahead and you encourage to resign and anybody else you think ought to resign, and then you encourage Republicans to lose.
And encourage Republican voters to stay home, act mad, and show these guys a lesson.
And just keep in mind who you're gonna be uh putting in power.
Audio soundbite number three.
Another C I told you so here liberals don't care about the children in this Foley business.
They are just ecstatic over the uh hypocrite game they get to play.
Last night, John Roberts sitting in on CNN for Anderson Cooper, talking to Randy Cohen of the New York Times, the question, so what does that do to the entire party, this Foley business?
It delights me.
I think if you're a person who can't enjoy the downfall of a hypocrite, then you have no sense for life.
Remember, Foley is the person who castigated President Clinton.
Very vigorously for having a consensual affair with someone quite a bit alder.
It is strikingly delightful to see a hypocrite fall.
Predicted all of this yesterday, and they set this up, of course, because the Republicans are the people that judge.
You conservatives, you fundamentalist Christians, you NASCAR types.
All you do is sit out there and judge other people.
That's all you do.
And the Libs hate you for judging them because you're not perfect.
Who gives you the right to judge them?
What gives you the right to define right and wrong?
What gives you the right to define good and evil?
You know, no human being is perfect, but most human beings know the difference between right and wrong, whether they're able to follow the principles on a daily basis 100% of the time.
Nobody is, by the way.
But just because you owe failure at uh doing the right thing all the time does not discredit you from knowing what right and wrong are, which is what the libs want you to think.
The libs want you to think that nobody who has a single human failing has the slightest ability or right to define what's right and wrong.
It's the root of what many of their arguments.
What do you mean you can't talk about the defense budget?
You didn't go to Vietnam.
Who the hell are you?
You can't talk about the NASA budget, you've never been in space.
You can't tell me about morality and right and wrong.
You've been married and divorced twice, three times, whatever they want to say.
And they hope in doing this to totally obliterate the lines that separate right and wrong, good and bad, moral and immoral, and they want to get to moral equivalency, and they are the ones who promote I cannot say this enough.
They are the ones who promote the willful choosing of imperfection in human lifestyles.
They coddle imperfection.
They don't find imperfection repugnant at all.
These are the guys that defend criminals.
These are the guys that try to get criminals out of jail.
These are the guys who are soft on crime.
Why?
Because it's really not the criminals' fault.
We're all imperfect.
The real problem is the people doing the judging and want to put them behind bars.
What right do they have to put anybody behind bars?
And so, when you when you have the guts and the courage to stand up for what you think is right.
Let me ask a question.
Let me let me put it point blank.
One of the things that Foley did, and the psychological reasons for this are somewhat interesting.
We could get into that if you want, but we don't have to.
Foley was in charge of some committee in the House on uh on protecting children from predatory sexual acts.
Uh psychologists are saying that's that's because he uh he wanted some internal protection mechanism or what have but but forget the psychological reasons for a second.
Mark Foley was the author of some decent legislation in this regard, and Mark Foley uh uh chaired committees uh hoping to bring about change in this area.
Does it make what he did bad simply because of these emails and instant messages?
Does it does it say that what Foley was trying to do in this area is no good?
Does it change the right versus wrong aspect of what he was trying to do?
Does it discredit what is obviously right simply because he failed?
The Libs would have you believe it does.
And in the process, there is no such thing as right.
There's no such thing as good.
It all becomes relative.
And so you've got dip.
Like this guy Cohen from the New York Times, ostensibly a journalist, is reveling here in happiness, admitting it, how happy he is when hypocrites fall.
This is what libs live for.
And I I'll tell you this this is uh is gonna put a lot of pressure on people because they don't want to be accused of being hypocrites, and the pressure that the liberals are bringing here is uh designed to see to it that fewer and fewer people have the guts and the courage to stand up for what's right and wrong, good and bad, moral and immoral, uh, because they're just gonna get toasted by liberals uh the next time there is a human failing on the right.
There are human failings all over the place.
Human failings do not change the essence of the definitions of right, wrong, good, evil, moral, immoral, and what have you.
Looks like the only Democrat issue left is uh Mark Foley, the uh Dow Jones Industrial Average has surpassed its all-time trading high of 11,750.28, and the oil price has tumbled below $59 on ample supply.
They say, well, this is because the uh hurricane season uh you know it didn't ramp up the uh way the experts predicted it.
I wonder will there be any apologies for the uh uh uh botched predictions?
No, there won't be because they will say, well, we uh were we were more prepared uh this season because of these predictions.
Bill Gray at uh Colorado State, Colorado, wherever he is, says that uh we'll have no more major hurricanes, a couple more storms out there, one more named hurricane, name storm out there, but uh that's uh that's pretty much it.
Uh well, what's driving oil so low is uh supply and demand.
There's there's uh the greatest supply of it.
I'm Snerdley.
I had a great little line about what's driving the oil price under $59, and I can't tell you I it's a very funny line, but and I asked the staff what they thought of it.
Um said, no, don't even allude uh to that.
Uh Dawn loved it but thought it would be risky.
Uh Snerdley said, no, you know, but he's still trying to egg me on into saying the line.
I'm not gonna say it.
Um I sent a little instant message of the line to Matt Drudge, and he said he just spit coffee all over his uh computer uh uh terminal.
And I said, be glad that's the only stain on that terminal given what's happening out there today.
Uh he said you just made me spit the rest of the coffee on the terminal.
At any rate, so what what issue do the Dems have left?
I mean, what the Republicans ought to do, and I just say this one more time, rather than act all defensive about this Foley thing, we have corrected a mistake.
They're calling that hypocrisy.
Now stop and think about this.
A mistake has been corrected.
We all make mistakes in life.
We all do.
Many of us have the good fortune of a second and third chance to correct them.
The liberals want to call that hypocrisy.
The thing about it is they try to control the debate by insisting that only they can comment on fallibility because they're the ones with no standards.
They love it when people who have standards fail.
Because then they get to obliterate the whole concept of standards.
Nobody's entitled to set standards.
Liberals can't stand being judged.
The guilty usually can't.
And so they're just, they just they're all excited about this.
But what have they got?
The Republicans, it's time to stand up, swing back, led by the speaker, and say, enough of this.
Where's your plan to protect the country?
Where's your plan to keep this economy going?
Where is your plan to fix health care?
You keep talking, don't tell us you're gonna do things smarter.
We want to hear specifics.
One of the things that Democrats are saying about that, by the way, well, we can't afford to be specific because the Republicans are just tear it to shreds.
No, they can't be afforded uh can't afford to be specific because if they were to be honest, they'd blow whatever chances they do have of uh having some sort of victory in the upcoming um elections in November.
The uh North Koreans have said uh today they're gonna conduct a nuclear test amid what it calls increasing U.S. hostility toward the uh communist regime, prompting the South to raise its security level.
That'd be South Korea.
U.S. also said it would raise the issue in the U.S. Security Council later today.
Whoopty-doo.
The uh statement from Pyongyang Ping Pong gave no precise date uh as to when a test might occur.
Uh the DPRK will in the future conduct a nuclear test in a condition where safety is firmly guaranteed, said the North Korean's foreign ministry in a statement using its official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
Um, Kim, why don't you why don't you invite Madeline Albright over there to your show to that party uh while you're at it?
She loved your shows the last time that she was there, so if you're gonna do one of these, invite one of the people that enables you to do the test.
Quite an interesting comment from uh Pennsylvania Governor Fastetti Rendell at a press conference to discuss the shooting at the uh Amish School.
We will have that for you.
▲
Export Selection