All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 3, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:25
October 3, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Yeah, greetings and welcome back, uh, my good buddies, uh, good friends, L. Rushball and the uh Excellence in Broadcasting Network, I am America's real anchor man, serving humanity simply by showing up at 800-282-2882, the email address is rush at eIBNet.com.
Great to have you uh uh with us, ladies and gentlemen.
We had just uh learned that Speaker Hastritt will be on the phone with us uh for a uh a brief chat about a half hour from now, 1.33 Eastern time when we start the uh second half hour of this program.
In the meantime, uh there's an ongoing press conference taking place in Pennsylvania over the um this tragic uh shooting at the one room Amish School and the uh uh Governor of Pennsylvania, Fast Eddie Rendell uh was there.
Very, very curious answer to this question from an unidentified reporter, Governor Rendell.
Do you see any need for any changes in state public schools in terms of security?
You can make all the changes you want, but you can never stop uh a random act of violence by a person who is intent on killing themselves.
Uh it's the same thing as protected president of the United States.
You can have 50 Secret Service agents there, but if someone is willing to swap their life for the presidents, they're gonna get a point-blank shot at the president.
Wow.
I mean uh as an addendum to this, the movie about the assassination of George W. Bush will open October 27th in uh various theaters here in the United States of America.
Now, what a way to answer the question.
Fast Eddie, uh, you're gonna do anything to ramp up security at the schools.
Nah, it won't matter.
If somebody wants to come in and wipe out the president, you can't stop them.
I mean, if they're willing to lose their lives in the process, there's nothing you can do.
Uh Governor Rendell, would you uh care to weigh in on uh your thoughts on port security?
Well, there's really nothing you can do if somebody's gonna put a nuke uh in a container coming into ports and they're gonna hide in a container with the nuke and set it off the minute that they're discovered, there's nothing much you can do.
Uh Governor Rendell, Fast Eddie Rendell, uh what what can we do here about airline hijackings?
We just had another one.
Uh Turkish airliner was hijacked uh and landed in Italy.
By the way, we've learned the motive for this now.
The motive was the uh Islamists uh aboard were uh trying to make a statement about the Pope's words.
So, Fast Eddie, what can we do about airline hydro?
Well, there's really nothing you can do.
You can put 50 air marshals up there, uh, and you can put uh you can put lead all over the cockpit door, but if somebody's willing to die uh in order to bring down the plane, there's really nothing you can do.
Um about the best thing uh you could do, uh Fast Eddie would say is have a drink.
You know, get it get an adult beverage, get a cocktail, and uh and then say your prayers.
Uh Fast Eddie, what what uh what about the uh prospect of uh terrorists hitting the uh uh the electricity grid or maybe uh poisoning the uh water supply.
Well, there's really not a whole lot you can do if somebody's willing to drink that water immediately after poisoning it and uh and and uh dying.
I mean, there's you could have you could have uh all the security you want at the ports, you can have all the air marshals who want up there in the sky, but if somebody's willing to wipe themselves out, there's not a whole lot you can do.
Just like if you wanted to kill the president, fifty secret service agents couldn't stop it if the guy's willing to get up close point blank range and die himself.
Now that's gotta make you people in Pennsylvania awfully comfortable.
When he gets a question about increasing security at the schools and basically says won't matter.
Is that what he said?
He said, Well, you can make all the changes you want, but you can never stop a random act of violence by a person who's intent on killing themselves.
Sounds to me like he doesn't think it's possible to stop these random acts of violence.
I wonder if that extends to terrorism.
Well, you know, you really can't stop these things, Fast Eddie would say.
Um tract with America.
I I think, ladies and gentlemen, I know what the liberal contract uh with America is.
There's three uh three basic components.
First component is we will discourage conservative turnout at the polls.
Uh the second element of the liberal contract with America is we will discourage conservative turnout at the polls.
Uh The third element, this is the clincher in the liberal contract with America, we will discourage conservative turnout at the polls.
I think, folks, is becoming more and more apparent and obvious to one and all that the left has nothing to run on.
Foley is it.
Now that now there's going to be another scandal that they've been holding at a bayons at Clinton war room working on these things, and it'll probably be I've already the little office pool here.
I think by three o'clock Friday we'll know what the next one is as they gin up discussions for the Sunday shows and into next week.
What they're running on is nothing but negatives.
They don't offer peace.
They don't offer a recipe or a policy for peace.
They don't offer prosperity.
Just the opposite.
They're trying to convince you that your country is in an economic shambles.
They know they're they're not they're not even talking about uh offering up what they consider to be good Supreme Court judges.
They're not even being positive about that.
Now stop, when you think about the Republican campaigns in the past, presidential and midterm campaigns, one of they've had many elements and they have been positive things.
Tax cuts, smaller government, I know chuckle chuckle, reducing spending, I know chuckle chuckle.
Uh peace, prosperity, uh changing the direction of the Supreme Court, there have been specifics.
Uh the liberals are offering none.
They are obsessed with uh with doom and gloom, and so their their strategy depends entirely on conservatives staying home and not voting.
Especially you Christian conservatives, you really need to stay home.
They convince you to stay home.
Uh why that they think that's their recipe for victory.
So the the liberal playbook, the game plan is to discourage as many conservatives as possible from voting.
So that leads to question, are you discouraged?
And should you be discouraged?
Well, let me ask you again, what does Mark Foley and all of this attention being paid to uh his instant messages and so forth?
What does that have to do with the key issues of our times?
What what does Mark Foley have to do with keeping us safe at home?
What does Mark Foley have to do with winning the war on jihadism?
What is Mark Foley have to do with keeping our economy growing?
Uh what is what is this whole Foley episode have to do uh with putting more money in your pocket and not Washington's?
You know, Mark Foley, and then he had to have a mandatory uh rejoinder.
What he did was inexcusable.
But whatever it is he did, uh it has nothing to do with the issues that shape the future of the country, over which most of you traditionally go to the polls and vote.
But Foley has everything to do with your turning out or your not turning out, and their contract with America is to discourage conservative turnout.
Period.
That's it.
That is all they have.
And you can't you really couldn't even say that that's all they have to offer.
They just they're not offering anything.
They're threatening.
The key to the 2000 election is not really President Bush, and it's not President Hillary.
The key to this election could be Brian Ross.
Brian Ross, you say, why Brian Ross?
Well, who is Brian Ross?
He is the solemn and very serious investigative journalist who broke the story.
Uh not of Foley, not of Foley's emails.
He broke the story of the IMs, the salacious instant messages right before the election.
The question is, did Brian Ross uh find the story, or did the story find him?
Ladies and gentlemen, we know the how, But we don't know the who.
Someone in some war room handed him this story.
We know he wasn't out beating the hustings.
He wasn't out there, as these reporters want us to believe, scouring the bushes or wherever it'd have to go to find this information.
Brian Ross knows who gave him the story.
But of course, sources are protected.
We must always protect our sources, shield laws and so forth.
If that name ever gets out, we ever learn who is behind this.
And there are a bunch of theories out there on the internet already.
It will be very interesting.
I suspect that we'll learn more about this after the election.
But remember, voting in America turns on peace, prosperity, and Supreme Court judges.
The liberals can't afford for you to vote on those issues.
They will lose.
The Liberals and the Democrats can't afford for you to be thinking about such things.
Look at them.
They go back and forth.
They try to make campaigns out of domestic issues, and they try to hold on, they just try, but then their cook base loses it, and they go, and then Woodward comes out with his book about which we'll speak in a moment, and they go after uh Rumsfeld, they go after the war.
Bush is a liar, they just can't help themselves.
Now they've totally forgotten the war, they're on totally on Foley.
Now this will end and something else will pop up and their agenda will change, but I'm just telling you, and I want you to be totally prepared out there.
All of this has one single purpose, and that is to keep you from showing up to vote.
Now there's just one thing here, and I'm gonna go to your phone calls here right after this.
Interesting.
So by the way, Rush Lynn bought talent on loan from God.
Brian Ross, ABC, I just mentioned to you a moment ago could be the focal point of this.
Uh New York Times papers knew of Foley email, but did not publish uh stories by Anne Cornblut and Kate uh actually Kit Seeley.
Uh at least two news organizations were tipped off to email messages sent by Representative Mark Foley long before the story of his sexually explicit remarks to teenage pages broke last week and forced him to resign.
The St. Petersburg Times and the Miami Herald received copies of an email exchange between Foley and a teenager, but neither paper gathered enough solid material to publish a story, according to statements by the paper's editors.
The same time the paper's decisions not to report the accusations are being cited by Republican leaders as justification for why they themselves didn't step forward earlier to try to stop uh Mr. Foley.
Uh Denny Hastert said yesterday he'd he deceived his in-state newspaper uh when they questioned him.
Uh he deceived me too.
Uh then uh uh well the St. Petersburg Times said that last November it received copies of an email exchange between Foley and a former page from Louisiana.
The uh newspaper said the boy who was underage didn't want his name used, and the paper said that it didn't want to publish accusations based on unnamed sources.
That's awfully convenient.
Didn't want to publish because of unnamed source.
I'm gonna have a heart attack.
Fred Sanford here.
It's the big one.
But it gets better.
Brian Ross, ABC News, said he learned about the email messages in August.
But he was too busy with Hurricane Katrina.
And the anniversary of September 11 to pursue them immediately.
None of the news organizations seemed to anticipate how big the story would become.
I never thought it would lead to his resignation, said Ross.
Translation, I never thought I could get a Pulitzer out of this.
So Brian Ross of ABC News has known since August of possible crimes against children.
And held it until he thought he could get a Pulitzer with it.
Because you know how you win Pulitzers.
Drive Republicans out of office or you give it a good shot, like Rather, and Mary Mapes, they got Peabody awards uh for this, the edit Well.
Well, uh if if there No, I that could have been that the papers might have been fearful of outing Foley because these were male pages.
Um yeah, these you know that that I'd tell you it's the Democrats are coming across as gay bashers here the way they're going after Foley.
But it is interesting.
If if these pages had been women, young girls, would the St. Petersburg Times and the Miami Herald have uh have gone to uh gotten into action sooner, or were they afraid of outing um uh Foley uh as as gay?
And that's that's a reasonable supposition.
So you could say, is it possible St. Petersburg Times and the Miami Herald would hold news, would suppress news that is possibly placing children at risk so as to avoid outing someone who uh everybody's now saying they always knew was gay.
Tough questions asked by me here on the EIB network to the phones to Albany in New York, and Tom, thank you for waiting.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Hi, Rush.
It's a great honor to speak with you.
Thank you.
Rush, I've noticed something I'd like to know if you've noticed it also.
Every year, prominent Democrats such as Howard Dean and Madeline Half Bright won the country about the October surprise.
Yes, yes.
Let's go back to 2000.
The October surprise, every newspaper carries the story of George Bush's DWI in 1976.
Then there was Kerry telling the country that tons of explosives were stolen in Iraq under George Bush Bush's watch.
Then you just mentioned Dan Rather, Bill Burkett, forged documents.
This year, the October surprise is an all-out smear on George Allen.
I live in New York and I like Janine Pierrow.
They're telling the truth for once, the Democrats.
There is an October surprise, but it comes from them, Rush.
What do you think?
Well, I think they're there's no question.
And they uh they're doing this as a defensive well, it's an offensive maneuver, but they're doing this uh for defensive reasons.
Folks, they have to take your minds off the issues.
I'm glad you brought up that business about the DWI in two thousand.
That did come close to defeating Bush.
And you know why?
I'm gonna tell you why.
It's because some of the uh the Christian right, some of the conservative uh people out there say, Oh, I don't I'm I don't I don't want to mess with this.
And uh it was an effort to suppress the vote, and there's as some people with theories that it worked, they're trying it again, folks.
That's why I'm trying to warn you.
This whole thing is being portrayed as the Republican Party is totally corrupt and a uh they're full of sinners, and uh yet they're the holly holier than now among us and judging everybody else.
The only strategy the Democrats have is not an agenda that is positive and inspirational that you can join and support.
The only agenda they have is to suppress your vote.
And that's why I cringe when I see people on my side of the aisle urging that our guys quit and uh and resign.
It's just not the way to deal with this.
Here is Laurie in Geneva, Florida.
Laurie, I'm glad you waited you're next.
Uh thank you so much, Rush.
I'm just uh thrilled to be able to get through to uh uh longtime listener, first time caller.
Thank you.
I'm calling because uh I was thinking that the Republican voters will not be uh distracted, those that actually will show up uh will come out, they'll vote for uh the name that says Foley, know who his replacement is.
I think if the Democrats could vote for a dead guy in Missouri and know that it's a place marker for someone else, that I think the Republicans will do the same thing.
Excellent point.
You're talking about the widow Carnahan.
Yes.
Yeah, her husband Mel perished in a plane crash in a campaign uh for the U.S. Senate against John Ashcroft, and uh uh she got a large sympathy vote.
Uh people knew that they were voting for a candidate who had perished in a plane crash.
And if uh if people in Missouri Democrats can figure that's excellent point.
They don't have quite the same analogy here, but still you're what you're saying is Republicans are smart enough to know that uh this is our seat uh and there is a Republican running here, and we gotta vote for Foley in order to elect that Republican.
You think this is true for most of the Republicans in your district up there?
I I believe so.
Uh I think if there are Republicans that aren't informed that they don't listen to you or keep track of what's going on, they're just gonna see his name as uh someone that they recognize and uh name that they know.
It'd be hard for them not to know about this Foley thing, but I just I find it the the see the the Democrat theory is that Republicans gonna be so outraged.
Even though Foley's not on the belt.
Why we're not gonna vote for Republic?
Why I'm I'm throwing my party under the bus.
I'm throwing my party overboard.
I can't believe Foley did I. It's a Republican district than it has been for twenty-five years.
And John Boehner said the other day that he thinks the seat's lost, and I just don't.
I I have more faith in uh the voters.
But apparently some do.
And we are back on the cutting edge of societal evolution, the EIB network.
And we're happy to uh be joined now by the Speaker of the House, Denny Hastert.
Mr. Mr. Speaker, welcome to the EIB network.
Great to speak to you again, sir.
Thanks, Rush.
Great to be with you today.
Uh now the the I guess the the uh the the big news is the Washington Times uh uh uh admittedly conservative editorial page has asked for you to step down and resign, and you have uh said you're not going to do that, correct?
Well, yeah, I'm not gonna do that.
What we've tried to do is uh folks focused on this Foley thing is do the right thing.
Uh we had two uh mess you know, there are two uh pieces of paper out there, one that we act we knew about and we acted on, one that happened in the two thousand and three we didn't know about, but somebody had it, and uh you know they're trying and they drop it uh the last day of the session uh be you know before we uh re adjourn on a uh an election year.
Now, we we've took care of Mr. Foley.
He's uh we found about out about it, asked him to resign, he did resign, he's gone.
We asked for an investigation.
Uh we've done it, we're trying to build uh better protections for these page programs.
But uh, you know, this is a political issue uh in itself, too.
And uh what we've tried to do as Republican Party is make a better economy, uh protect this uh country against terrorism, and we've worked at it uh ever since 911, work with the president on it, and uh there's some people that try to tear us down.
We are the insulation uh to protect this country, and uh if they get to me, uh it looks like that uh you know they could affect our election as well.
Well, it it's clear to me uh that what the uh uh Democrats are doing here and some sort of uh uh cooperation with some in the media is to suppress conservative turnout uh by making it look like you guys knew this all along, but because you're so interested in holding the house rather than protecting children that you covered it up.
Uh and I I like what you said yesterday, if if I may editorialize this way when when you said, look, somebody knew this long before we knew it.
Somebody knew about those instant messages, and you asked for an investigation into who knew what when.
We know that a couple of newspapers in Florida knew a lot more than they uh were were willing to release, and Brian Ross of ABC admitted that he knew about this all the way back in August, but he didn't have time for it then because he was worried about the Katrina anniversary in September eleventh uh and so forth.
Is that investigation you've called for gonna go anywhere?
Who who's gonna chair that?
Who's gonna run that?
Well, first of all, you know, we've asked the federal government, we asked the FBI, and I don't think you'd ask any better anybody better than the FBI, and they they have brought this investigation forward.
We've also asked the state of Florida, because it's uh my understanding that's where most of these uh messages uh of circa 2003 uh came from.
So uh we've asked the state of Florida to uh uh come forward with an investigation as well.
Many of my listeners watch all this and they see a predictable pattern.
Uh they've been uh watching politics and observing it for many years now.
They see that this is a strategic political uh or politically timed release of information, particularly based on how long ago it has been known.
Uh and there is I I have to tell you, there's a there's a hunger and a real craving amongst uh conservative voters for Republicans in Washington, House and Senate both, to simply refuse to be set back on your heels and go on uh and accept this defensive position and and just go on offense and strike back at these guys.
Hey, Mark Foley is not what this future of the com future of the country is about.
It's about protecting the nation, national security, prosperity, ongoing efforts uh to maintain a good economy, not destroying the health care system and this sort of thing.
Is there a is there a uh a problem that that Republicans in the House and the Senate have about going on offense when these kinds of things happen?
Well, you know, uh absolutely not.
We are going on offense, but you have to answer the concerns that people have on the Foley situation.
I've tried to answer them.
Uh we've made the uh page system safer.
We're going to work to make it even more safe.
But the fact is uh we hit the high time of uh uh Wall Street today.
Uh the economy is good because we've done the right things and holding taxes down and holding litigation down and holding regulation down, and I'll tell you, if we lose this election, if this goes back over the Democrats, it'll come back in spades.
Uh what do you mean it'll come back?
You mean the they'll reverse the work?
So you'll see higher taxes, you'll see more legislation uh litigation, you see more uh regulation.
That's what they're all about.
And uh you know, we won't have this economy.
We have worked to protect the uh the this country against terrorism, uh passed legislation to do that.
We've had a fight guys like Leahy every day to make this thing happen, but we've done it.
About the Page program, uh is it really uh in bad shape?
I mean, you have uh the Foley incident.
We we don't know rud i uh if if there was ever any real contact between uh Foley and any of these pages.
Uh understand he sent these these emails that could be viewed as predatory.
But is the Page program really uh in in a in a in a dire circumstance here that means there's two sets of of emails, first of all, or text messages, I guess what they are.
And uh one was done in one set or one, some a bunch of them were doing done in two thousand and three.
Uh we never knew about it.
Somebody else held those uh all the way from two thousand and three until now.
The next set uh was uh uh the other one was something that the family asked uh uh uh representative Alexander to look into.
He contacted uh counsel in our office, our consul put him to the page board, page board confronted Foley, and this was the Katrina message that said basically, uh how did you get through the you know the hurricane?
Are you okay?
Uh but the parents wanted him we didn't know what the text of that message was because the parents held it and they didn't want it revealed.
But we stopped we went to Foley, told him to stand down, don't do this.
We asked if there was any sexually explicit language in this uh message.
There was not.
And uh we thought we had this thing resolved.
Uh on the other hand, uh, you know, uh we're trying to do better.
As I said, since I've been speaker, uh we've taken the pages out of a dilapidated building, put them in a safe building, uh, giving them twenty-four-hour uh supervision, uh put more people in the page uh building so that they're uh they have contacts, they have people who uh look over them and and uh work with them all the time.
Uh they are under uh basically twenty-four hour uh supervision while they're in uh Washington.
This happened when the pages left Washington.
And uh, you know, we're the same situation with parents all over America and trying to make sure our kids are safe, and we want to work uh to make sure all this text messaging stuff and uh computer stuff is safe too.
Uh Mr. Speaker, I am I'm hearing a lot of people.
I'm in Florida, and of course there's a lot of uh press talk about this and and uh uh individuals uh, including in Washington, who um are saying, Well, we've known for a long time of Mr. Foley's sexual orientation.
Uh was there any w when the first set of emails hit uh and and the red flags of alarm went up, was there any hesitation on the part of the Republican leadership to not deal with this public at that point because of his sexual orientation and and not to appear to be gay bashing?
No, first of all, what we knew was exactly what I told you.
Uh the parents uh contacted, they w they wanted someplace to go to because they want didn't want this contact to go on.
And what we knew about it was that Foley uh contacted this kid through email and asked him how he got through the uh hurricane, the Katrina hurricane, he was from New Orleans, I guess.
And the second and the other part of it was well, we didn't know anything else other than what they told us.
Uh we went to uh Foley, confronted him, he said he wouldn't do it anymore, he was Sorry, he's just trying to uh talk to the kid.
He liked the kid, nice kid, and uh he wouldn't do it anymore.
We told him not to do it anymore there or to anybody, period.
I know time is limited.
Let me ask you one question that's unrelated to this.
Um as is exemplified today in the Washington Times editorial, and there are others uh in the uh the so-called conservative movement pundits who have written op-eds in various publications in recent weeks suggesting that it might be good for the Republicans to lose control of the House because they have uh have failed to govern as the conservatives they campaigned as.
All the spending, I mean you you've heard the complaints.
Is there is there sort of a silly question?
I think I know what your answer is gonna be, but I still want to put it out there.
Is there anything to be gained uh by is there a lesson you guys in the House could be taught by losing this election?
Look at you know, we could lose uh and let the Democrats uh be in power for ten or fifteen or twenty years, forty years like they were the last time, because once they get power, they can uh they can solidify that power, just like we've been in control for twelve years.
And I th I would like to uh put that on.
But if you look at what we've done over twelve years, you know, the fact is over the last four years, uh we've had flat spending on everything except uh national defense and homeland security.
Uh, if you look at what we've done with the budget and the economy, uh last year was the first time that we ever cut uh real uh uh non uh uh you know uh uh spending uh that we did, and uh we cut spending 40 billion dollars, and uh, you know, that's the first time that's been done.
Uh but you know, that's what our record is, and that's probably why the Democrats don't want us there.
Well, has it has it been any has it been a challenge as uh leader of a conservative caucus in the House of Representatives uh on occasion when the president has wanted to spend a lot of money on education uh or when the president has a uh a view of immigration different from the majority of Republicans in the House.
Is that tough for you?
I mean, you it's tough to buck your own president.
My view in the House's view that we need to protect our borders first.
And quite frankly, I went to the president and said that's what we're gonna do.
And we did it.
We did it through an appropriation process uh with cap spending, but we did.
We put almost uh two billion dollars uh along the border and border protection uh uh devices and fences so that uh you know we could stop immigration.
My view is we ought to have zero penetration policy, and it's got to be the will of the Congress and the will of the of the country to be able to do that.
Uh but we've done what we thought was right to do, and when we differed from the president, we have went ahead and did it.
Okay, before I let you go, you know that the uh the Democrats and the media are gonna continue to press the Foley issue, even though you've dealt with it, even though he's gone, even though the mistake has been corrected.
Uh what is the battle plan to deal with these continuing allegations and accusations that are going to be designed to depress voter turnout?
I'm talking about in the media.
When you dispatch it, you know, one of the things that we have to do, we're we're doing a media outreach, but you understand that a lot of that media is not going to listen to us.
Our issue is we have to go back local.
That's why we got our our folks back home uh on the campaign trail.
I'm going to be in thirty some districts uh over the break uh to leave Monday morning, and uh we'll be continuing on the trailer.
We have a story to tell.
And the Democrats have have I, in my view, have put this thing forward uh to try to block us from telling story, to try to put us on defense.
The story is that we have protected this country against terrorism.
The story is we have created a good economy in this country, and the story is that uh we we're we we have a plan for uh energy independence, which we have to do as well.
And uh that's important.
Mr. Speaker, thanks for your time.
I appreciate it.
I know you're handed by a lot of well, we appreciate you making time for us.
That speaker of the House, Danny Hastert, a brief time out, and we'll be back right after this.
Just a couple of points here about our discussion with the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert.
One of the interesting points he made was that all these instant messages uh between Foley and the Pages took place when the pages were out of town.
Number one.
Number two, uh, he, Hastert, is being accused of not investigating based on the early emails, which is all he knew existed.
Uh And others are suggesting he resigned because of that.
But I noticed the FBI didn't think that there was anything to investigate either when it came to the emails.
And uh last I looked, that was a professional law enforcement operation.
The FBI didn't think there was much to it.
Brian Ross didn't think there was much.
Nobody thought there was much to it.
And so the people that originally released the emails said, Well, if this isn't enough, and by God, we're going to release the instant messages.
And so forth.
And um, and that's uh what got the gist of this going.
Connie in Denver.
I'm glad you waited to appreciate your patience.
Welcome to the EIB network.
Hi, Rash.
I was intrigued by what you were saying earlier about how the Democrats wouldn't give us a type of contract with America.
And I bet I could guess uh what it would be.
Uh first of all, I think they would um cut and run out of Iraq.
And second, I think they would impeach President Bush, and third, I think they would raise taxes, and I think that is their contract with America.
Well, uh yes, uh they have that.
That's as I said, there's one guy, Charlie Wrangle, who has admitted all of that.
Uh Charlie, in fact, the Wall Street Journal quotes him uh today uh that he would defund the war in Iraq, that he would reverse every tax cut.
There's not one of them that's worth keeping.
As for impeaching the president, um uh the Democrats are assuring us they they're not gonna do that.
But they can't control somebody like Conyers who would end up a chairman of a committee.
They they would uh uh certainly start investigations, whether it led to impeachment or not, what the purpose of this would be to just totally bring to a screeching halt operations at the White House, uh flood the place with subpoenas, demand documents, all this sort of stuff to just freeze the Bush administration where it is.
Now, of course that's their contract.
They can't dare say that, other than wrangle, and he can get away with saying it because his constituents, you know.
Hell, you could put Santa Claus on the ballot in uh in his district and Wrangle would still win.
Uh so it's there's no question what they would do.
That's why I've I I've I've tried to be urging the House leadership here today to not stay on defense about this Foley business to talk about what's at stake.
What are the issues that people actually turn up and vote on?
The Democrats are trying to suppress Republican turnout over this Foley stuff and whatever else that's going to come out of the Clinton war room between now and the election.
I'm just saying don't fall for it, folks, because you know damn well when you go to the polls and vote, you don't vote on stuff like this.
Well, you shouldn't.
Most people don't, particularly at this important historical junction in our nation's history.
Here is Patricia in Tallahassee, Florida.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Rush.
Hey, thanks for taking my call.
I am sitting here safing.
I can't imagine that anybody would not vote, or Republicans in particular would not vote, or would not re vote Republican because of this.
This is a call to arms.
I mean, we should all rally and support.
The Republicans stood up and did the right thing.
Whenever this came up, Foley is out of here.
We now have, you know, the Republican Party that we need to support.
And as opposed to the Democrats, when this happens, they rally around the person that's bad and keep want to keep them in office.
Which is rally around the good people.
They condone the behavior.
They they they challenge anybody who's uh who's uh criticizing the behavior as unfit.
Well, who are you?
You can't judge anybody, you're imperfect.
These people need to be defended and blah, blah, blah, blah.
You're exactly right.
And I think there's a you know what you're essentially saying is that there's a new sophistication out there.
This is that's why I said last uh or yesterday, I think this if they keep it up, it's gonna cause a backlash.
I I'm I'm thinking we had a call last week before the Foley thing hit from a guy whose daughter was to land in Baghdad uh in two hours uh when he was on the phone with us.
And he was simply livid at the message and the words coming out of the mouths of Democrats.
And he was saying that uh uh there just there is anger and rage all over the country about what the Democrats are saying, but it's never reported in the drive-by media because the drive-by media is never going to report when there is unhappiness with Democrats.
The drive-by media will report when they are unhappy with Democrats, and they will do so in the uh in the essence of warning them to improve this or improve that.
But uh the picture's being painted a country loves Democrats, hates Republicans, and they really hate Republicans because of Foley, and it just goes totally against human nature.
Backlash on this and a number of things probably already happened.
Dribble dribble dribble or spurt spurt spurt, ABC with a new round of IMs featuring Mark Foley, ladies and gentlemen.
Yeah, tell me this is not set up.
▲
Export Selection